Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP July 25, 1989 CA. CITY of ANDOVER special city Council Meeting July 25, 1989 7:30 P.M. Call to Order l. Public Hearing/IP 89-18 Storm Drainage/Watt's Garden Acres 2. Public Hearing/IP 88-16 street Construction/173rd & Navajo 3. 4. Adjournment "CA CITY of ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (612) 755-5100 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JULY 25, 1989 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City CouncIl was called to order by Mayor JIm Elling on July 25, 1989; 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmembers present: Knight, Orttel, Perry Councilmember absent: Jacobson Also present: BRW Engineer, Mike Thomas; Bonestroo Engineer, Glen Cook: City Admlnistrator/ Engineer, James Schrantz; and others PUBLIC HEARING/IP 89-18/STORM DRAINAGE/WATT'S GARDEN ACRES Mr. Thomas reviewed the entire storm drainage project being done as a joint proJect between Coon Rapids and Andover and the proposed Improvement, IP89-18 which encompasses approximately 30 acres in Andover north of 133rd and between Jay Street and Hanson Boulevard. He noted the land use in that area Is both single-family residential and commercial and explained how the assessments are based on a weighted factor based upon land use. The two assessments for the proJect are approximately $2,770 for lateral benefit and $983 for trunk facilities per weighted acre. Mr. Thomas noted that within Andover they are proposing to construct two storm water ponds adJacent to 133rd Avenue on the Olson and Smith properties, and Interconnect them and a trunk piping system from Jay to 133rd easterly to approximately Hanson Boulevard. Existing piping wi I I carry the water downstream, eventually to Coon Creek. No lateral wll I be constructed until development plans are proposed for the area. The laterals will not be assessed until those Improvements are In place. Huble Smith. 13309 Jav Street - asked if the pond on Olson's will overflow. Mr. Thomas stated the water will drain down to pond in the designated wetland area. MI I ton Mardaus. 13380 Hanson Boulevard - asked If they have any Idea how much water that wetland has had over the last seven years. He asked If it wi I I flood; and if so, how much. Mr. Thomas stated it will flood because the water will be directed to it. Because of the vegetation in the pond, they know that area has flooded intermittently. Mr. Smith - asked how they determined there should be a pond on his property. Mr. Thomas reviewed the overall draInage district statIng to derive the most economical system, they are using both piping and Special City Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 2 (Public HearlnQ/IP89-18/Storm Drainage/Watt's Garden Acres, Continued) ponding. The basic flow is from east to west. In looking at the pond chosen to be on Mr. Smith's property, they looked at the contour map and the Impact in terms of flooding as to frequency and magnitude of water. They tried to select an area that would Incur the least amount of expense to implement the system. Mr. Smith's back yard Is adjacent to the wetland to the south, and the contours Indicated some flooding will occur when it is fully developed. The parcel was selected as a matter of convenience because it Is adjacent to the proposed alignment of the road. It was also chosen because of the elevation of 133rd Avenue. Mr. Smith - stated there Is a pond In Coon Rapids Just south of him, but now Mr. Thomas is saying they want to take that pond out of Coon Rapids and put It In Andover. Mr. Thomas stated there will stil I be pondlng in Coon Rapids at that location. The system consists of a combination of the three ponds in this area, that on the Olson's, on Mr. Smith's and in Coon Rapids Just south of 133rd. Mr. Smith - stated he didn't see the pond indicated on any of the plats for the area in Coon Rapids. Mr. Thomas stated he designed It and made the computations for storage himself, assuring Mr. Smith that the pond In Coon Rapids will remain. Mr. Mardaus - asked If both ponds In Andover are going to be dug down for the cost of $153,000 In this proJect. Mr. Thomas stated the $153,000 Includes both trunk and lateral faciltles. The lateral work, that Is the storm sewer piping for the parcels, is not proposed to be done at this time with the exception of the Olson property which receives lateral benefit off the trunk. Mr. Mardaus - asked If Mr. Thomas is saying the only area that Is going to benefit is that in the designated area on the map, the 30 acres In Andover, and none to the west. Mr. Schrantz explained that Andover Is assessing the area to the west of Jay Street as a part of another project related to this same overall storm sewer system. This Is the next phase of that system. There was further explanation by Mr. Thomas, Mr. Schrantz and Mayor Elling as to the overall storm sewer system and how this Is Just a small phase of it, that everyone In the entire drainage area will pay the same equated assessment. Mr. Mardaus - asked why It is necessary to go north of the ponding area. Mr. Thomas explained that eventually that area will develop; and with increased pavement and housing, a reduced amount of water will perculate Into the ground. So the water needs to go somewhere, explaining they have found it most economical to combine both ponding and piping for storm water drainage. Special City Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 3 (Public Hearing/IP89-18/Storm Dralnage-'Watt's Garden Acres, Continued) Mr. Mardaus - stated they already have a natural flow to that pond, and the DNR has worked there over the years. Why does It need to be made bet ter. Also, east of Hanson Boulevard Is only park where there will be no development. Mr. Thomas stated increased development will create more runoff, and the water needs to be directed positively or flooding will occur. There Is some parkland east of Hanson Boulevard, but there Is also a large area to the south of It that wi I I probably be developed some day. Mrs. Mardaus - asked if the pond will be dug down, aSking several times for mOre specifics. Mr. Thomas stated there will be a minimum amount of excavating, with most of It to the north end. The area to the north Is proposed to go down to 81.6 feet; It is now at 82 or 83 feet. The proposed Improvement wl1 I come up to and abut the Mardaus property, but I twill not go onto their property. The excavation will be anywhere from zero feet to about a maximum of four feet on the north side. though Mr. Thomas didn't have the specific grading plan with him this evening. Mrs. Mardaus - asked If the large pond Is why it is so expensive. Mr. Thomas again explained that everybody over the entIre drainage area Is being assessed the same rate; though as time goes on, the costs wi I I be inflated accordingly. Mr. Schrantz also explained that the pond on Kottke's is built to a 100-year storm but has an overflow down the ditch of Hanson Boulevard to the Olson pond. Mr. Smith - asked If there will be standing water in his pond, as he was told that it was strictly an overflow and they could expect to see water only In a 50- or 100-year flood. Mr. Thomas stated there will be water in Mr. Smith's pond with each rain, as the bottom of the pipe Is equal with the bottom of the pond. Mr. Mardaus - noted this Is the third time he Is being assessed for something, and each time it shows a different amount of area. The Eglneers explained the area proposed is based on the half-section maps, which are not very precise. More accurate figures would be gotten from a survey. There may also be a portion of the property that has a zero factor because it is unusable. Mrs. Mardaus - again asked If they are going to do something to their property. WI I I the pond go onto their property? Mr. Thomas stated no, there will be no work done on their property. The graph is accurate regarding the size and piping between the ponds. Mrs. Mardaus - has trouble with this because when water and trunk Jines were talked about at other meetings, they went along Bunker Lake Boulevard. Now that area isn't included. Mr. Schrantz stated that was a previous project, IP86-3. This is the storm drainage boundary. Special Ci ty Council Meet!ng July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 4 <Public Hearlng/IP89-18/Storm Drainage/Watt's Garden Acres, Continued) Mr. Smith - asked Mr. Thomas if he saw the drawing done by Terry Herman, BRW, of the pondlng on his property. He was told by Mr. Herman that there would be no water in that pond and that they would leave some woods. Now he is being told there will be some water. He expressed frustration at the conflicting things he has been told. Mr. Thomas stated there will be water In that pond. The area where Mr. Smith's asparagus patch and garden Is probably would only have water at a one- or two-year frequency. But the lower level will have water whenever It rains. His Info~mation generally indIcates that the water would stay 10 that pond for 24 hOUrs for a lOa-year event. Mr. Smi th - said Mr. Herman told him water would be in the pond for three or four days when it flooded. Mr. Mardaus - understood Mr. Thomas to say that if there is a 100-year flood, the water wi I I be In that pond for only 24 hours. He said in essence, then, they are paying $153,000 for a 100-year flood. Mrs. Mardaus - asked how this affects their assessments and what does it do for them If they develop. Mr. Thomas stated the trunk facilities being installed give area benefit. If the parcel develops, the laterals, storm sewer pipes to run to the trunk Ii ne and ponds, will be constructed to provide lateral benefit for each parcel. Ken Gust - is doing some private consulting for some of the landowners being affected by this proJect. He asked about the assessment. Mr. Thomas stated the trunk line Is being assessed at this time; the laterals will be assessed when development occurs, with the exception of the Olsons. Mr. Gust - asked how the lateral costs can be determined without knowing the proposed layout of the land. He also asked how it works, assuming this Is the first one being developed. Mr. Thomas explained the lateral costs are equated on a weighted acre amount throughout the entire storm drainage district. If the land doesn't develop, only the trunk assessment is levied; the lateral assessment is levied at the time of development. Mr. Thomas also showed the portion of the project in Coon Rapids and Andover that has already been developed. This Is a continuing development in the drainage district. Mr. Schrantz stated the City should not be bil led for more than what it costs Coon Rapids to build the trunk. Then Andover will assess those costs. Olsons will be assessed for both trunk and lateral because they will have a fully-developed project. Those properties to the north will only get a partial assessment. Mr. Gust - asked If the water Is a] 1 beIng piped directly to the ponds first. Mr. Thomas stated not necessarilY. Some water will be directed to the pipe going down stream and will flow Into and out of the pond. Special City Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 5 <Public Hearln9"IP89-18/Storm Drainage/Watt's Garden Acres, Continued) Mr. Gust - asked If all the water from the Mardaus property flows to the pond and then out. Mr. Thomas said yes. Mr. Schrantz Informed the Council there Is a sketch plan for development of some of the northern parcels In this area. He also felt the Council can look at several options such as deferring the assessment. Councilmember Orttel felt a disadvantage of deferring Is the interest accumulates. Mr. Schrantz didn't mean that the Interest would be paid. The City needs to be sure that it continues to pay Its share. But the City shouldn't be billed for nor assess any more than the costs of the project. The remainder would be assessed when It develops. Mrs. Mardaus - asked how soon they have to pay these assessments. Mr. Schrantz thought It would probably be assessed next year, as the improvements will not be done in time to assess this year. Mr. Smith - asked what the assessments were and how they are determined. Mr. Thomas reviewed the lateral and trunk costs based on weighted acres and land use. Mrs. Mardaus - asked what happens with the 150 x 326-foot nonbulldable portion of land they own which Is the power line easement. Do they have to pay assessments on that? Mr. Thomas stated none of the power line easements have been excepted. It Is not entirely unusable, as driveways and parking lots can be built under the easement, though not buildings. Mr. Mardaus - stated the easement was there when they bought the property but that 150 x 326-foot easement could not be used. Mr. Sml~ - asked what assessment he will get If he doesn't develop, noting with the pondlng easement, there really isn't much left to develop. Mr. Schrantz explained that Mr. Smith will pay both assessments at this time because he receives lateral benefit off of 133rd. Mr. and Mrs. Smith discussed the flooding In the pond proposed for their property, again noting they were told the only time water would be standing there Is In a 50- or 100-year flood. Mr. Thomas again stated there will be standing water in that pond when it rains, agreeing to run the calculations again for Mr. Smith if he wishes to see them. Mr. Mardaus - asked If there will be another meeting where he can discuss the power line easement on his property. Council stated yes, at the assessment hearing when the project Is In. Councllmember Qrttel didn't see any dollars included for the purchase of ponds. Those costs would then be included In the costs of the project and assessed back. Mr. Schrantz stated Andover is responsible for acquiring the regional ponds in Andover. Mr. Thomas stated In Coon Rapids the ponds were platted during the platting process, and none were acquired. Special Ci ty Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 6 (Public Hearlng/IP89-18/Storm Drainage/Watt's Garden Acres, Continued) Jack McKelvv - related his experience with property he owns in Coon Rapids where the pond was acquired and the proJect assesed back. He also didn't understand the assessment against Mr. Smith's lot. Mr. Schrantz again stated he would receive lateral benef I t off the trunk line and would be assessed both lateral and trunk benefits. Councllmember Orttel was also concerned with the 2.0 factor on commercial property. Because that is a large assessment, there has been a suggestion to assess it as a residential rate until It develops. But his maJor concern is that there is no petition aSking for this Improvement. The City Is only reacting to a Joint powers agreement It has with the City of Coon Rapids. Councilmember Knight expressed the same concern about the pond acquisition costs not being Included and the Issue with the power line easement. Councllmember Orttel thought it may make sense to treat the easement at the same weighted factor as wetland or unbuildable for residential property. Mr. Schrantz felt they would know more from the sketch plans received for about 12 acres north of Olsons and Smiths. Mr. Gust - stated the sketch plan Is a reaction to the project. If the proJect doesn't go, they probably wouldn't develop the I and at this time. Mr. Schrantz stated If the proJect does not proceed, they may not be able to proceed with Kirby Estates. Mayor Elling suggested tabling the matter until the Issues raised are addressed. Wavne Olson - asked If a delay wi I I affect the final plat of Kirby Estates which Is to be before the Council on August 1. Mr. Gust - asked if the proJect cost Includes the excavation of the ponds. Mayor Elling stated yes. Counc II then agreed to table the Item until August 15 when there Is a fu I I Counc il and to get more accurate costs as to the acquisition of ponds. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, to so move. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. and Mrs. Olson again asked for assurance that this action would not affect their final plat at the next Counc il meeting, not!ng Kirby Estates has enough acreage to pond on site If this proJect is not approved. They are under some time constraints and some contracts will have to be rejected if the plat is not approved next week. Mr. Schrantz said they could probably pond on site but there would be no overflow. Mayor Elling stated they will try to get the matter resolved by August 1 so the plat can be considered, but the matter wi I I be discussed again on August 15. The hearing was tabled to August 15. 8:53 p.m. Specl a I City Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 7 PUBLIC HEARING/IP 88-16/STREET CONSTRUCTION/173RD AND NAVAJO Mr. Cook reviewed the feasibility report on the construction of 173rd, Navajo, and the overlay over the existing blacktop on 175th and outlined the estimated costs for the three parts. The proposed assessments for Part I Includes those on southern Navajo contributing equally for the construction of 173rd Avenue. Another scenaro would be if those parcels were counted as a half unit and everyone else in all three parts as one unit, then all units would have an assessment of $4,125. It is assumed that all right of way would be donated. Ray Lacv. 16627 Navaio. Parcel #4 - stated when they bought the property, he paid extra because there was blacktop In front of It. He doesn't want this project because he already has blacktop. Council discussion noted that portion was paved when It was in Oak Grove township because of the erosion in the road, and the parcels were not assessed for It. Linda Richards. 4707 175th Avenue. Parcels 3 and 5 - stated she bought her home three years ago, one of the reasons being there was tar In front of it. She assumed the road was paid for. She is total]y against any assessment for 175th, thinkIng the tar they have Is fine. Mr. Cook stated nothing is proposed in front of those few houses along 175th. Ms. Richards - asked how long the road has been in. Counc i I estimated since 1973 or 1974. Mr. Cook stated some sections of the tarred portion are deteriorating, and it Is a matter of time before It will need to be overlaid. The policy has been that the benefitting properties would pay for that Improvement. There is some benefit by including the whole neighborhood. ? first one on 175th - said there Is no benefit to their . . property, as they have no reason to go down 173rd. She stated Mr. Knight, who owns the entire "U" shaped property, is being assessed only one parcel, which Is less than her assessment. Yet he can subdivide that property. She stated she has been through this process in another city and has never seen a assessment method as this one. Usually they are done on a front footage method where each lot Is assessed on the number of feet on the street. Mayor Elling stated that Is one assessment method, though the unit method has been used for the past several years very successfully. Mr. Lacv - again stated he has blacktop and has not asked for this. The City has taken care of It al I these years. Mayor Elling explained that In al I projects done in the City, those directly benefitting have paid for them with nothing coming from the General Fund. BIll ? - doesn't see the road deteriorating that bad. It's been . the same way for years and years. Another person from that area stated they are the people using the road and they are happy with It the way I tIs. Special City Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 8 (Public Hearing/IP88-16/Street Construction/173rd & NavaJo, Continued) Mr. Lacv - stated there is only one bad area. Mr. Schrantz stated the Public Works Department has had a problem with it, and they would like to see it overlaid. Mayor Elling noted the advantage to doing it now would be It is going to be more expensive to do In the future. Richard Wandersee. 17315 NavaJo. Lot 7B - stated he was interested in having the feasibility study done. He felt there Is value in having the entire road blacktopped. He is not comfortable with the idea that the northwest or southwest section be done and having the middle section not done. In the long run It makes more sense to do the entire road at one time. Connie Protlvinskv. 17325 NavaJo - understood when other projects were done, like Russell/Stack, that all the costs were divided equally among the peole. Why isn't that being done here? Mayor Elling stated part of the logic In assessing the people in Russell-Stack was that they all get usage of that road. In this Instance, those on south Navajo have already paid for their street, and they are volunteering to pay a portion to have 173rd done. Legally they don't have to contribute to this. Mr. Lacv - stated everybody paid the same there because everybody was gOing to be uSing the road. Mr. Wandersee - felt there is precedence In the Russell-Stack proJect of the City assessing equally to people who use the road. Counc il noted the problem Is they only have a petition asking for costs from 173rd north and a petition from those on south NavaJo to construct 173rd. There Is no precedent for people from one area to petition for and be willing to contribute toward a street they don't live on. Someone In the audience possibly the Council should only consider the area petitioned for. Mr. Wandersee - again expressed his opinion that the City needs to look at blacktopping the entire area, not Just a portion of the road. Council determined eight people along south NavaJo signed the petition in favor of constructing 173rd. Car01 Stolz. Lot 14 - stated they do not use 175th and access off Seventh Avenue. The lot is also in the flood plain and is not buildable. Mayor Elling noted If the access If off Seventh, It will not be assessed. Mr. Schrantz stated if the lot Is made buildable In the future, It will be given an assessment at that time. ? - asked how that would be returned to the people who paid for the road. Mr. Schrantz stated It wouldn't, but no one would get a free street. Special City Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 9 (Public Hearing/IP88-16/Street Constructlon/173rd & NavaJo, Continued) Norm Vletz. 2B - stated all those people got a street paid for by taxes, and he resents that. Yet those people do not want to Join Into this project. He's lived there 20 years and feels there Is no reason to divde that Navajo Street proJect. AI I the property owned by Mike Knight is developable, yet he would pay the same benefit as a 100-foot lot. Mr. Schrantz stated when Mr. Knight develops, he would get an assessment for each unit. He can only subdivide into 2 1/2 acre lots with 300 feet of frontage, as the City no longer allows 100-foot lots In the rural area. He probably could only get 6 lots If It Is subdivided. Mr. Vletz - was opposed to the project if he has to pay the same for his 100-foot Jot as Mr. Knight does for the potential of six or seven lots. He felt $5,000 Is too expensive for 100 feet of blacktop. Counc II discussion again noted the existing blacktop was put In for emergency purposes in about 1974 because the school buses were not even able to pass through. It was not assessed to the residents as It was a township at the time which does not have the authority to assess. Since It has been a City, all projects have been totally paid for by the benefitted parcels; and that policy has never been varied from. Mr. Vletz - asked who paid for Crosstown Boulevard. Councllmember Orttel noted It was paid for by the county from everyone's taxes. Mr. Vletz - again expressed his opinion that none of the people In the "B" project area should be assessed $5,000 for 100 feet of frontage. Councllmember Orttel thought that It Is high, estimating a typical street proJect in the urban area to be about $2,800 a lot. Counc II discussion was on the difficulty of assessing this proJect because of the greatly varied lot frontages and lot sizes. The pol icy Is the costs are divided equally among the units; and If a lot Is subdividable, the assessment Is based on the number of potential units. It Is also a unique situation because of the "U shaped' parcel that fronts on 175th, Navajo, and 173rd and the polley of assessing for only front footage. It Is also unusual because of the petition from southern Navajo to improve 173rd and volunteering to contribute toward that proJect. No one fronting 173rd has petitioned for it. The only slmlliar situation was in Russell/Stack; however, Mr. Stack agreed not to develop his property for 10 years. Bob Protivlnskv - stated he signed the petItion to look at the costs. Now that he's seen them, he is opposed to the project. He asked how the assessments are paid. Mr. Schrantz stated It would probably be over 10 years at 8 percent Interest, or about $800 a year. Special City Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 10 (Public Hearln9"IP68-16/Street Constructlon/173rd & Navajo, Continued) Elaine Vietz. IB - stated she wanted tar when they first moved in, but now she doesn't care any more. A resident asked how long it will be before gas comes through and the road gets torn up. Mayor Elling explained gas lines would be put in the boulevards and would not disturb the road. Willard Makl - gave the background of why 175th was tarred, noting the drainage would come from the hills In front of his property Into his yard and down his driveway washing out hIs septIc system and making 6- to 7-foot gorges In the yard. It was then blacktopped and the hll I cut down so the water goes toward Seventh Avenue. He lives on 175th and has blacktop now. If the third proJect is done, he felt everyone benefits. Also, if It is done, he asked that the corner be taken care of because it is still bad. Counc II discussed treating it as three separate projects. Mayor Elling asked for a show of hands of those In Part III who are In favor and opposed. None were in favor; three were opposed. Mayor Elling then asked for a show of hands of those in Part II who are In favor and opposed. Two were In favor; two against. Mr. Wandersee - was not In favor If it Is not treated as one project and the overlay is not done. A resident from Part II mentioned two other parties that are not in attendance but who have expressed opposition to It. Mr. Wandersee - stated all the residents he talked to were In favor of the blacktop but wanted to know the final costs. Mr. Schrantz stated In order to proceed, a petition asking for the Improvement would be needed from Part II. Discussion was on the maintenance of a small portion of dirt road if Part II Is not done. Mr. Schrantz explained the difficulty of maintainIng a sand road. He didn't know what the cost was to maintain that road, stating It Is done on a regular cycle. They put some Class 5 on a portion of the road, but It Is almost a waste because It gets bladed off. ? - stated whenever he calls Public Works about the road, the grader Is out within 24 to 36 hours. He didn't think that is a regular cycle. He guessed 173rd was graded 10 times last year, noting the City Is picking up that cost. That cost should be considered In making the decision on this project. Special Ci ty Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 11 <Public Hearln9"IP88-16/Street Constructlon/173rd & Navajo, Continued) Discussion continued on the maintenance of the dirt road, several residents also suggesting it would be more cost effective to all the residents to pave It rather than continue maintaining a dirt road. Counc II also pointed out that even Improving the road with Class 5 Is an assessable project and not to come out of the General Fund. Someone suggested then the City should pay for a portion of the costs of tarring. Council again explained that none of these residents have paid for any of the Improvements done in the urban area or any other part of the City; it cannot now be expected that everyone would pay for theIr street. Mayor Elling noted that Mr. Padula owns four lots, but he Is not present this evening. He wondered what Mr. Padula's position Is on the road improvement. Mr. Wandersee - stated he told Mr. Padula about the improvement. Mr. Padala indicated he didn't care whether it went In or not but wanted to pay a fair share If It did go through. ? - noticed the Perrys have two lots, stating they do not go out onto 173rd yet are being charged for the one lot. Why are they only getting one assessment. Councilmember Perry stated their main access is onto Seventh Avenue, but they do access 173rd to bring In hay and to get to the pastures. Because of that access, they would be assessed for the one lot. She also explained under existing City pol icy, the side and rear yards are not assessed. The assessment for Councilmember Knight Is the same as for anyone In the City. Councllmember Knight stated he didn't ask for this project and has no Interest In developing his property. He also stated there Is no way he could affort to pay assessments for all his frontage. Plus there Is a power line easement runlng parallel to 173rd about 30 or 40 feet In which Is not usable, so developing that parcels will be very dl ff I cu It. Also, he doesn't drive on 173rd or use It at alJ. Mayor Elling stated in defense of Councilmembers Perry and Knight that they have never expressed an Interest In the proJect. A lengthy discussion continued about the project, again noting there Is no petition for the northern section of NavaJo and none from those who actually abut 173rd. It was noted the Attorney's opinion was If those on southern NavaJo are included In the assessment, they are Included as part of the benefitted properties. Eight of those parcels did petition for 173rd, which makes It an adequate petition. There are 19 parcels in Part I , so there would be a maJority petition for doing 173rd to southern Navajo. Because Mr, Padula has the most lots In Part I , Mayor Elling had some concern that he was not on a petition in favor. Mr. Schrantz stated he talked to Mr. Padula who stated he didn't have a problem with It, but he didn't sign anything either. Special City Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 12 (Public Hearin~IP88-16/Street Construction/173rd & NavaJo, Continued) ? - stated the road system is like a little basin, suggestIng . aJ I costs be lumped together and divided against the properties. Mr. Wandersee - again argued if it Is to be done, the Counc il shou I d only be doing the entire roadway, not in pieces. Larry Sturaeon. NavaJo - stated they had originally agreed to contribute $1,700 per lot to the construction of 173rd. Now it is up to almost $2,000, stating everyone Is still agreeing if it will get the road In. But those on southern Navajo already have a tarred road which they paid for, yet some are suggesting they pay again to get Part II and Part III done. He didn't think that was fair; he never uses any other road except 173rd. Bruce Perrv - asked about the petition. Mayor Elling noted the law reqUlre5 35 percent but the Council wants a maJority before ordering It. The petition 15 8 for out of 18 parcels, so he didn't 5ee 173rd a5 being a problem. The fir5t few lots in Part II have Indicated an Intere5t, suggesting a section to Include only those lots be added a5 an alternate bid to find out the actual costs for doing that area. Councllmember Perry had reservations about doing only a portion of the proJect, thinking from a City standpoint it doesn't make sense to leave a small portion of a road unfinished. Mayor Elling agreed, but that is not what the people want. Mr. Cook noted one scenario of adding the costs of the three parts together, with those 13 parcels on southern NavaJo paying $2,000, the remaining parcel5 In all three parts would have an equal a5sessment of $4,025 each. It doubl es the costs to those abutting 173rd but reduces the amount to the other two parts by alm05t $900 per lot. Mr. Sturaeon-stated they are not willing to pay for Navajo or 175th. Mr. Vietz - continued to be adamant about the unfairness of the distribution of the assessments. DIscussion wa5 then on the proposed distribution of costs. Several re51dents along southern Navajo expres5ed frustratIon at the lack of progress In getting 173rd tarred, noting they have tried to get It done for years. They didn't feel the problem5 wIth Parts II and III of the proP05al affected them at all and did not want that to stop them from getting 173rd done. They were hoping to see a tarred road on 173rd this summer; but if action i5n't taken now, it will be too late. Arguments from the residents were repeated of doing the entire roadway, not just a portion of It, of having a 100-foot lot pay the exorbitant amount of $5,000, or even $4,025, for a road, and of equalizing the asse5sments by u5ing the linear foot method. StilI another thought the Council should Just act on the petition before them and order 173rd to be done. Special City Council Meeting July 25, 1989 - Minutes Page 13 (Public Hearin~IP88-16/Street Construction/173rd & NavaJo, Continued) Counc il discussion also noted that the Knight property would receive two assessments if it is indeed two separate legal parcels. Mr. Cook noted that would be looked up at the assesment hearing. Councllmember Knight stated he would not vote on the matter, not even for Part I, because he does not agree with doing only a portion of the project. He needs to know how the total project will be handled and that an equitable assessment will be determined. He, too, would like to see Padula/s position on the proJect. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Pe"ry, to continue thIs until the first meeting in August. DISCUSSION: One resident was frustrated that the Council would not proceed, noting Mr. Padula received the same notice as everyone else. Councllmember Orttel noted it could be voted on at this time; but It probably would not receive the three votes needed. Then the entire procedure would have to be started again. He felt it was to everyone's advantage to walt until there Is a ful I Council. Arguments from residents were repeated on ordering Part I of the project now so the residents In that part are not penalized. Others wanted consideration for all three parts or none at all. Council noted to order the entire project, a 4/5 vote is required because there are no petitions for Parts II and III. Those residents In Part II were asked If they would be willing to circulate a petition. Councilmember Knight stated he Is not necessarily against the project but wanted to have the entire distribution of costs determined before proceeding so he, as a large land owner, doesn't end up with some unmanageable assessment. He Is also potentially involved In both Parts I and II of the proJect. Councilmember Perry strongly felt It Is not advisable to do only Part I and felt that some scenario can be worked out to the satisfaction of aJ I residents. By only doing Part I, a short section of dirt road is left for the City to maintain; pIus it will be very expensive to those residents in Parts II and III to have that portion tarred in the future or to have 175th overlaid when that Is needed. This Is not a typical proJect, and she felt some equitable solution should be found. If no petition is received from Parts II and III, she would like to see the Counc il vote on It requiring a 4/5 vote to order It. Councll- member Perry also calculated that if the costs were spread equally throughout the entire basin, It would cost $3,300 per lot. Councilmember Orttel AGREED TO CHANGE THE MOTION to August 15 when there Is a full Council. Second Stands. Motion cd""led unanImously. \\ Th~ PUbl,lC He~::c:~;;:~=x:ed to August 15, 1989. 10:32 p.m. '~~each' Recording Secretary