Loading...
1b Quinn Road Sanitary Sewer CITYOF 690 City Center Drive PO Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Phone 952, 937,1900 General Fax 952.937,5739 Engineering Department Fax 952.937,9152 Building Department Fax 952.934.2524 Web Site www. ci. chan/mssen, m,.tls MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Teresa Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engineer Mahmoud Sweidan, Engineer July 17, 2001 Approve Plans and Specifications for Quinn Road Sanitary Sewer Improvements; Authorize Advertisement for Bids - Project No. 01-05 Plans and specifications for the above-referenced project have been completed and are on file in the Engineer's Office. City Council is requested to approve plans and specifications and authorize advertisement for bids for the project. The project includes: Extension of sanitary sewer in Quinn Road north of Lyman Boulevard. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated May 23, 2001. 2. City Council Meeting Minutes dated May 29, 2001. C: Shibani Khera, WSB ',/03.5a ~ . Dave Hutton, WSB Bill Bement, Engineering Technician IV Matt Saam, Project Engineer g:\eng\public\01-02Xapprove plans.doc Received · Revision No. Approved by Ci~ Ent~eer Date ';I/l'~l,~ Approved by City Council CITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 CiO' Ce,ret Drive PO Box 147 Cha,hasse,, ~lS,,esota 55317 Pholle 952.937.1900 General Fax 952,937.5,L~9 Engineering ieparm~ent 952.~3Z9152 Building Deparment 952.934.2524 l~b Site wwu~ d. ch,,~hmse,. MEMORANDUM TO: Scott A. Botcher, City Manager FROM: Mahmoud Sweidan, Engineer DATE: May 23, 2001 SUBJ' Public Hearing - Approve Feasibility Study for Quinn Road Improvement Project No. 01-02 Staff recommends approval of the Feasibility Study for installation of only the sanitary sewer portion of the above-referenced project and Ordering the Preparation of Plans and Specifications. A neighborhood meeting was held on May 17, 2001. With the exception of the petitioning property owners, all of the affected property owners expressed opposition to the installation of the sanitary sewer, street, and watermain improvements at an estimated cost of $109,300. To address the petitioner's need for sanitary sewer service due to their failing septic system, staff is recommending extending sanitary sewer along Quinn Road approximately 250 feet north of the existing terminus. The estimated total project cost is $25,000 and is proposed to be assessed 100% to each of the benefiting property owners. Failure to accept the Feasibility Study and Order the Preparation of Plans and Specifications will delay the project. Attachments: 1. Revised Feasibility Report. 2. Petition from property owners opposing the project dated May 18, 2001. 3. Letter from Kari Kalkman dated May 22, 2001. c: Teresa J. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engineer Matt Saam, Project Engineer Phil Gravel, Bonestroo & Associates g:\eng\public\01-02kstaff report - 5-29.doc City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Councilman Ayotte: Okay, thanks. Mayor Jansen: Any other questions for Sergeant Potts? Councilman Labatt: No, just a comment from a resident. I got a phone call from a homeowner over on Stratford Ridge thanking him for your fine response of the deputies and the fire department for their medical situation over there. Thank you. The only problem was the muddy footprints in the carpet. I told the lady that that's just the cost of doing business at 4 days of rain. Dave Potts: Sometimes it's unavoidable, but appreciate the comment and I'll certainly pass that on. Mayor Jansen: Thank you for sharing that. Thank you. Appreciate your report. Okay we're moving on to public hearings, of which we have several this evening. We have 6 public hearings. And why don't I say before we get started with these, what we would appreciate, and we realize we've got a couple of issues here involving neighborhoods and neighbors. As you are hearing comments being made before you, if you could avoid standing up and repeating the same information. We have obviously received the packets that include the minutes from the public hearing and neighborhood meetings that occurred on the trail connection so we do go through all of those comments and any of the e-mails and letters that we receive. So if there's new information that you would care to share with us, we obviously appreciate your approaching the microphone and sharing that information with us. So why don't we go ahead and we'll start with the first. PUBLIC HEARING FOR OUINN ROAD STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT 01-02. Public Present: Name Address Gary Skalb Amy Schuette Tom Schrupp Jeff Reitan Sherry Blosberg Nancy Fults 510 Lyman Blvd. 8990 Quinn Road 8990 Quinn Road 8900 Quinn Road 3000 West 44t~ Street 8913 Quinn Road Matt Saam: Thank you Madam Mayor, council members. Staff is recommending approval of the feasibility study to install sanitary sewer to the failing septic system lot at 8955 Quinn Road. This project was petitioned for by the property owners at 8955 due to their failing septic system. They have until, by law, November 27th of this year to either repair, replace or hook up to city sewer. The original feasibility study for the project looked at extending the street, the sewer and the water the length of Quinn Road. Staff's feeling was that instead of waiting around for each of the septic systems to fail and piecemeal the project we would look at serving the entire neighborhood at once. A neighborhood meeting was held a couple weeks ago. The majority of the neighbors were against the project due to proposed assessment cost. This project now, the one before you would be to just, as I said, extend sewer to serve the property at 8955 which has the failing septic system. The estimated cost as found in the feasibility is $25,000. The project is proposed to be assessed to both benefiting property owners on each side of the street. Again we are recommending approval of the feasibility study. I'd be happy to take any questions. City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Before I open this up for the public hearing, does council have questions for staff?. Councilman Ayotte: What's the basis of estimate for the assessment? I think you call out 50%. Is that it? Matt Saam: Correct. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. Why not 75? Why not 107 Why 50%? Matt Saam: Each of the lots which abut the street where the sewer would be put down will benefit from the installation of the sanitary server costs. Councilman Ayotte: In the future would anyone potentially benefit from the installation of the system? Matt Saam: Yes. Yep, the one on the west side would in the future. Currently there's no house on that lot but in looking at it, it could sure be divided. Councilman Ayotte: Well then, is there a potential for any other advantage to anyone else besides the two home owners for that sewer system in addition to that potential site? So there'd be a total of 3? Matt Saam: There would be 3 sewer stubs, yes. 2 to the west side, 1 to the east to serve the failing septic system lot. Your question, could you repeat that for me. Is there any? Councihnan Ayotte: Yeah, what I want to know is, here what we're proposing is that these folks would incur the assessment today. Down the road there may be others that would profit from the installation of the system. Matt Saam: Correct, sure. We have a policy, well not a policy. It's in the city code set up where there are connection fees and hook up fees charged to two lots. Lots that haven't been previously assessed pay the connection fee. Every lot that hooks up pays a hook-up fee. So that would address any lots that we forgot about maybe if that's what you're. Councilman Ayotte: But they would incur the front end cost. Matt Saam: These lots now? Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. Matt Saam: Yes. Yep. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. Mayor Jansen: Any other questions for staff at this time? Councilman Labatt: So just following up on Bob, so how do you make it fair and equitable for the future homeowners comparable to the current homeowners that are getting assessed? City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Matt Saam: Set up in the city code where this connection. Councilman Labatt: So is that connection fee the same as what these people are being assessed? Matt Saam: No. No, it does increase each year with inflation and construction costs but. Councilman Labatt: So these people are going to be assessed half of $25,000, correct? Matt Saam: Correct. Scott Botcher: I think the theory is that that will be recouped at some point if there's a transaction involving the property. I mean if you don't do it now, and say I was going to sell you my house, you'd be stuck with the same expense and same hassle getting sewer to your property as I would. It's just that you would defer it. If you did the time value of money put on top and you'd have the expense. Councilman Labatt: Okay. Mayor Jansen: Okay. This is a public hearing. If anyone would like to address the council on this item, please approach the podium and state your name and address for the record. Jeff Reitan: My name is Jeff Reitan. My address is 8900 Quinn Road. I think there's a missing component here in that Outlot A is simply that. It's one lot. The majority of that lot. Councilman Ayotte: Sir, could I ask you to pull the mica little bit closer. I don't hear very well. There you go. Jeff Reitan: Sorry about that. Is that better? Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. Jeff Reitan: The majority of that lot will likely be annexed to the adjoining properties to the south and to the north. My lot is the lot to the north ofOutlot A. So it's likely that there may be a future subdivision resulting in one lot being developed and the remainder annexed to the adjoining properties. I'd like to explore opportunities to modify the scope of the staff's recommendation based on that information. It's not clear to me if there's a final decision that's irrevocable or something that we can work towards a common resolution. Mayor Jansen: Okay, Matt. Can you address that for us? Matt Saam: I guess I'm not sure what your question is. What exactly are your concerns sir? Jeff Reitan: Your recommendations I believe include 2 connections to the west. Matt Saam: Correct. Jeff Reitan: Fin stipulating that probably only 1 will be required. So I'm asking that we work to modify the scope of the recommendation. Matt Saam: Okay. Basically eliminate a service stub. City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Jeff Reitan: Yeah. Matt Saam: Can I speak to that now or should I wait until after the public comments are closed? Mayor Jansen: If you'd go ahead and speak to that now I'd appreciate it. Matt Saam: Okay. Staff's thinking in stubbing 2 services to the west is the developable potential of that outlot to the west. We're just planning for future service connections. We just thought it's good planning. Inevitably if we don't put one in and the lot would sell, they would come back and say why didn't you give me a stub. Here you assessed the property but I didn't get a stub. Now I have to rip, go into the street, rip it up, connect, so that's what we're trying to avoid. Councilman Ayotte: You could blame him. Matt Saam: If he owns it. Jeff Reitan: I can't refute that. I'm just trying to help the council understand what our expectations are. Mayor Jansen: Sure, okay. Thank you. Councilman Ayotte: Point of clarification though. Is the assessment issue a craw for you? Is that? Jeff Reitan: We'd rather not see an assessment at this time. There's obviously no benefit to the owners of the outlot. Future benefit as described but no current benefit. If our expectations pan out we're just going to annex the north and south portions and perhaps develop the center lot. Matt Saam: Madam Mayor, if I could follow up quick. Mayor Jansen: Sure. Matt Saam: The cost of the actual service stub to the property to the west. One additional stub is $600.00. The total assessment is $12,000. So we'd be talking about deleting something that's $600.00. Mayor Jansen: And the future cost to do that, you were stating is then ripping up the road and then providing so incremental much larger. Matt Saam: Much more than $600.00. Mayor Jansen: Okay, understood. Thank you for clarifying that. JeffReitan: I think there's an existing premise that this was going to become 3 lots. There was a preliminary subdivision done by the previous owner and I just wanted to clarify that issue. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Anyone else wanting to address the council on this item? Okay, I'll bring this back to council. Matt, let me just pursue this and take one more shot at this. Where we're showing the two stubs going off to the west, is there any way to have it be one and service all 3 lots in the future? If it were to subdivide. City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Matt Saam: No. Not just a service stub. Then you're talking about a trunk or a sewer main. Mayor Jansen: Okay. So I think that's what we need to understand is that now is the time to provide that option or we end up doing it at a much higher cost in the future. Matt Saam: Exactly. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Let's bring this back to council. Any additional questions for staff?. Councilman Ayotte: I'm going to state my concern, and we can react to it that way. Maybe a question will come out of it. I'm not for septic. I don't like, it's not whether I like or dislike. It seems to me that we do not have predictable algorithm for assessments. We had talked about this before. What exacerbates the problem is because of our water situation we do not have the mechanism to generate more revenue because of our meter situation, which would help offset part of this problem. And because we don't have those things in place, I do not feel comfortable in giving a nod for the assessment levels that we have. And I don't know if there's a way of working through that. Scott Botcher: Except that, I don't get the tie between the metering and the assessment. Because it's not an algorithm. It's simply here's the cost of the project. Here's the determination of benefit on a percentage basis... Councilman Ayotte: I understand that but we had discussed before that if we had a larger population to accept assessments for improvements to utility, then it would not be allocated just to the folks that are receiving the immediate benefit. Over time, as we build the infrastructure, a lot of folks are going to benefit from it. Mayor Jansen: Am I recalling that was a conversation about our road projects? Scott Botcher: Yeah, I mean I think in terms of this you've got a finite defined area. You've got a defined cost with distinct beneficiaries, as opposed to a road or to a force main or to a water system or water treatment plant, something like that. Councilman Ayotte: I understood, maybe I understood incorrectly that down the road other folks could benefit, could proper from this improvement. Mayor Jansen: Only potentially. Phil Gravel: The people in the future would be assessed as the sewer were extended further north on a similar basis so if people benefit in the future they would pay an assessment at that time. Mayor Jansen: Okay, any further council discussion of this item? Councilman Labatt: None. Mayor Jansen: Could I have a motion please. Councilman Peterson: Motion to approve as presented. Mayor Jansen: And a second. 10 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Councilman Labatt: Second. Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the feasibility stuffy for Quinn Road Improvement Project No. 01-02 for installing only the sanitary sewer portion of the project, and authorizing preparation of plans and specifications. All voted in favor, except Councilman Ayotte who opposed and the motion failed with a vote of 3 to 1.- Andrea Poehler: This motion requires a 4/5 vote so the motion fails. Councilman Ayotte: I didn't hear that. Mayor Jansen: The motion just failed. We need a 4/5 vote to pass this. I think your question was addressed by the city manager. Councilman Ayotte: I, at this point do not feel comfortable because I don't totally understand, even though there's an equitable distribution for the cost of the improvement, I don't know ifI am accepting of the argument totally. I just don't feel comfortable with it at this point. And I would not be doing the right thing to say yes to it if I don't thoroughly understand and completely support what's being presented. Mayor Jansen: Then I'm going to encourage you to sit down with staff and go through this because I do believe that xve have gone. Councilman Ayotte: We have a time line, I know that. Mayor Jansen: No, xve've gone through the whole assessment process and that's ~vhat Mr. Botcher is trying to explain. Councilman Ayotte: Well let me ask some more questions then. With respect to assessments, xve have an algorithm that is predictable all the time, right? Scott Botcher: No. I mean that's the fundamental pretext. I mean anytime you do an assessment, the governing body of the city makes the determination as to benefit. That will change from project to project to project to project. That's just life. That's how it is. There is no mathematical derivation that you can lay upon a project and say, if you have this project, you lay this mathematical derivation upon it and it results in this assessment. That's not how it works. In this case we have a very, and it's a nice, small example quite frankly. We've got a small project. You've got a small number of beneficiaries and you make the determination as a governing body as to benefit and you assess based upon that basis. Bruce DeJong: Madam Mayor and Councilmember Ayotte, I'd like to address this a little bit because I've been involved in some very lengthy discussions with the city's counsel regarding assessment process and how we actually work things. To answer Mr. Ayotte's question, there is no benefit to any property that is not directly abutting the project. If they wanted to hook up to the city sewer in the future because of any other failures of a septic system, they would have to extend the sewer lines farther north from where it is terminating based on the engineering proposal. So there is zero benefit to any of the additional owners that are farther north on Quinn Road. They would not be charged a connection fee because there is nothing for them to connect to. 11 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Councilman Peterson: We have another smaller project similar in scale as this one potentially and have them assess that in the same manner as tonight. Bruce DeJong: Exactly. Scott Botcher: And carrying that, the risk of having the cost inflate, having smaller incremental administrative cost for smaller projects, I mean certainly it makes more sense to tie some of these smaller projects together and be done with them. I mean I think there's some efficiencies built into that. Certainly the governing bodies retain the authority to establish areas of benefit and make determinations of benefit and assess upon that basis. Now most of these just want to do assessments for the heck of it. If the neighborhoods really, really hate them, they're not going to do them. Councilman Ayotte: How is the assessment played out? How is it paid out? Over what period of time and how much of a hit do folks take on this? Bruce DeJong: That's certainly something that you determine at the assessment hearing process. Typically we've done these in 8 year payout. We do that with a fixed amount of principle payment and a reducing amount of interest payment on those special assessments. Councilman Ayotte: So there's latitude. There's some give and take based on the ability of the people to take care of business, is that true? Bruce DeJong: That's correct. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. I certainly think that there's some benefit to having the stubs put in place also ahead of time so that those service connections are available because certainly the intentions of property owners change and owners change on a regular basis because I was the beneficiary of that when I built my house in Minnetonka. Actually having 2 stubs placed on the larger lot that I ended up building on so. Councilman Ayotte: Understand my motivation for asking these questions. And if there's latitude for folks to get some relief in their ability to pay the assessment, I'm going to feel more comfortable about it. What can I put into a motion that would ensure that that particular point is carried out? Mayor Jansen: It's already policy. Bruce DeJong: I don't think there's anything at this point. The point where you do that is at the assessment hearing at the completion of the project. Scott Botcher: And our ordinances and our practices have allowed property owners to benefit through our tax exempt rate when we go to market. In other words, you and I can't go to market and borrow money for what the city can borrow money for. We pass that benefit on to the taxpayers who might choose not to pay their assessments at the time they were due, or in some cases pre-pay them and they thus benefit from us going to market so to speak on their behalf. Councilman Ayotte: And you said there's an 8 year period top end at this point. Is that typical for the area? Bruce DeJong: I think that's pretty standard. 12 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Councilman Ayotte: Alright. Mayor Jansen: At this point can we amend the vote or do we need to remove the motion and vote again? Andrea Poehler: The motion would need to be made to reconsider and it would need to be made by Councilmember Ayotte. Councilman Ayotte: I make a motion to reconsider this past motion. Andrea Poehler: Yes you would vote on that. Mayor Jansen: May I have a second please. Councilman Peterson: Second. Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to reconsider the previous motion. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. Mayor Jansen: Now we can just put a new motion on the table. Andrea Poehler: Correct. Mayor Jansen: May I have a motion please? Councilman Peterson: Motion to approve. Councilman Labatt: Second. Resolution #2001-31: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the feasibility stuffy for Quinn Road Improvement Project No. 01-02 for installing only the sanitary sewer portion of the project, and authorizing preparation of plans and specifications. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. Mayor Jansen: Thank you Councilman Ayotte for getting your questions asked. Appreciate it. PUBLIC HEARING FOR EXTENSION OF UTILITIES AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO DOGWOOD ROAD, PROJECT NO. 00-01-1. Public Present: Name Address Hat & Jen Newell Dick Lundell Amy Adamson Barbara Freeman Jay Rubash Richard Foley 7550 Dogwood Road 7341 Dogwood Road 7331 Dogwood Road 7431 Dogwood Road HTPO Inc. 7411 Dogwood Road 13