Loading...
7. Comp Plan Amendemnt to relocate MUSA 1 C 1TY O F P.C. DATE: March 7, 1990 • I CHAIIAE x C.C. DATE: March 26, 1990 i CASE NO: 90-1 LUP �� Prepared by: Krauss/v de I STAFF REPORT ii I PROPOSAL: Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment to Include 1420 and 1430 Lake Lucy Road into the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) Action by City Administrator Em IEndorsed e- Q Mod'ied 0 Rejecta' IV LOCATION: De.---031W-1-1P-7 Date Submitted to Commission CLD�c:.�-;;;;; to Ceuncit I � APPLICANT: 31_a e -II II - PRESENT ZONING: IIACREAGE: DENSITY: 1 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- 1 S I Q w- 1 W WATER AND SEWER: - PHYSICAL CHARAC. : II2000 LAND USE PLAN: II 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 LUP Amending MUSA March 7, 1990 Page 2 BACKGROUND In January, staff became aware of a problem with an on-site sewer system at 1430 Lake Lucy Road. The Building Inspector informed staff that the system was failing resulting in surface discharge of waste. The Public Safety Department is now requiring that the system be pumped as often as necessary. The owner was further informed that city ordinances give a 60 day time period to allow for the determination as to whether or not the system will be repaired or replaced but that this time period may be extended by the city if action is in progress. The owner of the lot with the failing sewer system and an adja- cent property have petitioned the city to undertake a guide plan amendment to expand the MUSA line to allow them to be served from an in-place sanitary sewer located a short distance to the east. Concurrently, they have requested that the city undertake a feasibility study with the goal of extending sewer service to their parcels. The sewer service is located a short distance to the east of 1420 Lake Lucy Road. The failing system is at 1430 Lake Lucy Road. Services in Lake Lucy Road must be extended past the home at 1420 to reach the home at 1430. City water service is already in existence in the area. Although we will not be certain until the feasibility study has been completed, it appears that gravity sewer service can be extended to serve both properties, by extending the dead end line in Lake Lucy Road further to the west. Given the pre-existing nature of the failing sewer system at 1430 Lake Lucy Road, staff is processing this as an emergency situation and am attempting to handle this as expeditiously as possible. ANALYSIS Over the years, the city has received a number of requests to expand the MUSA line on an incremental basis with some of these expansions taking place to provide emergency service for areas experiencing failing on-site sewer such as currently being requested. As the Planning Commission and City Council are aware, the city is undertaking a program to completely redraft our Comprehensive Plan with a goal to bringing significant addi- tional acreage into the MUSA system. It is anticipated that this process will result in a submittal of a plan to Metro Council during this coming summer. While we have been working on the plan, we have generally tried to discourage minor alterations to the MUSA line believing that it could more appropriately be handled in comprehensive matter with the guide plan amendment. However, in light of the emergency nature of this request, we are waiving this policy in the interest of resolving this matter. In so doing, sewer service could be extended to the affected prop- erty this summer. If the request to be handled with the compre- hensive plan amendment, it is not likely that sewer service could be provided until at least the summer of 1991. I ' I fA ! , , 6 • i 1 1 ! 1 C I_ 1 .D E E F PPrAaerrllr 1,7W6k,AL' a r.-rfrc 1 , f I 4 fj , f 1 fi11_,.! 4•07-4 of = � ��;.. A, r y A / �r .:41 - I a,•t ` Ica '�' __�.,, I ■ Il1*!_� {/ r Fs ..xfc Y i• ....._ivir......r.. ' •••--is _ ,.„. . t 11,—"e—' -(c4tH:1,-.71.1.. "----**1:117-77:= II-2 , I • _inlaid \s_ .. , _ . . !Ai 1 11111a. c „ : . r LJII.li4 'j . 10. ! _.... 1 c* _ f� 1 ,� ge_ - .: ,- am , 3 ...._ �F ;Il. _ - _ .. 1 t 1 1 ! i 1 i ! i 1 1 ! , an'of 1 . . l_ = l,i 'i 4 J L_____I I MT UM NAP - tare , Fr Ntfl PROPOSED--1 t .. '"• Y.�r �r1r iii j1N1�1 ' � 5 I SITE '° u •,1 . ....._i ,„1 .,..i 1 ______, :_,.. G{4Ni�SS�f[MOIEl7rq�f. �' :<r.. -� IMP tlL.M _ _ tpli a rA∎ . -.,.I• I ___ . 401111_1_111)11---rr . ...___ "4„,_______,--- . ! 16 . _ I i pd 1 • ..._. , ://1 _-,41 i .. - f - 7 I • M t • I f i i l ' f f I • 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I II . =Ili IF illnras . CIR L SUM INli MOW irrp LAKE lira \I 'OFT.1111:1:allegh W.! I LIZ Aticatiq s IN= . ...,01 hillitl'"11-- gl°(-C----- - OMNI ilk ... iiimikru. hr ak ritro \ tom tilPIII VIreeAll Iiir40 ;0441 est,„,,mlimmEN mat .0.11.4, - '4-- Al rAmi* . = El gt:444;114240 01.1.4- c,, ,.....inv) ..t.j...4,1 -5-4. wartrrAl rellikalt:0716=Op PIM%4mA ' II I IN IITANta --ozifiwks.. .,14 • t. elte. 1 i‘,: .. ot, ,,444riarA p ion°. .,. • * .6 4. co ciR(14.74 . , , s R ? at; ,4fr- 6-.,. as ftibealm I ....Ior .4,r g il P' amlnlimist A 1111181=0111 - . 111,N1.- 11111Ma , MI 4 '••• li I :7) Ill q, E., =mourn _ a warimini s,„, :411V7. I LAKE N 151011 P 2 1 ! N mi ..---.----- \ -1\ ••I -.1§1: r047or I r .__. 11IP.: Faqir.a t 0E3 011111 it, e . r%16 1 . 1 :, • _ cl1,1 m 1 EI wait .ril ..it- /114 I ' 1 d K F." Lune I 1 , I gpi: PROPOSED SITE r:!:::. . . . Pi I MUSA - I I I I . 1 • 1 i . LOCATION -MAP : : • EXISTING UTILITIES I c K ~ 1.,n •l RI�7LL •• Rf�:�� P err...MI MI 0 i.t war s o.pNn' i ..Awls . lir ._ ._.I t .I ». OA *I• AS - . � ., .�� —Tit lig ILL = .Lno..oe 00 ? �� w 4000. ���_= s w •• sego �OYTLOr f w DONAtD Y 00. E 70 w A "nil,•.M 1 i 0 S 4 i.4 >r } ! 2 ` 1 x_ 1 8613 aqL ( L { aS`:1' 4av =NIP f/MMIN WIMP NMI MI i 0 ii C 2 4 7 WILLIS E. LARSON , lies of Tract A • . e SK 34,►NI 1 , • .- .....- \I C 17• • mt. f ATE SANK ;04 CTI r mei 1 :::iNeRM.::::::::;;;::•.irk:•: 14:.:..1.:.•.........;;;;;{:I.r. t 1; rtik , S { :;tip 11:1:11:1 :11:::::!:11:11:.OSEPH E SLACCUM :: J:11:1 Main!"----I•--A do IL _ _ PILL ..__ •••NT• .`— •• 3...__.___— 1— —ROAD- — ._ -.�.-itlflk SW go% Wim'ERMAtd i 1 MEP AM am on• SEWER PROPOSED MUSH I X A.vES EXPANSION Ci I • STORM SEWER MANHOLE '•,•, -•c STORM SEWER (WITH OUTLETS) `� vi 544". I _ O ._ . . CATCH BASIN __ _ ' . , Nor•+arasamp wir M U 8 A LINE I INFORMATION SUBMISSION FOR - MINOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS This summary worksheet must be filled out and submitted to the Metropolitan Council with a ' copy of each proposed minor comprehensive plan amendment. Minor amendments include, but are not limited to: 1. Changes to the future land use plan where the affected area is small or where the proposed future land use will result in minor changes in metropolitan service demand. 2. Changes (land trades or additions) in the urban service area involving less than 40 acres. 3. Minor changes to plan goals and policies that do not change the overall thrust of the ' comprehensive plan. Please be as specific as possible; attach additional explanatory materials if necessary. If a staff ' report was prepared for the Planning Commission or City Council, please attach it as well. Communities submitting regular plan amendments may wish to enter this form or a reasonable facsimile into their word processing menu for ease in preparation of the form. Send plan amendments to: John Rutford, Referrals Coordinator ' Metropolitan Council, Mears Park Centre 230 E. Fifth St. , St. Paul, MN 55101-1634 • 1 I. GENERAL INFORMATION ' A. Sponsoring governmental unit City of Chanhassen Name of local contact person Paul Krauss, AICP, Director of Planning ' Address 690 Coulter Drive, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Telephone 937-1900 Name of Preparer (if different from contact person) ' Date of Preparation February 27, 1990 B. Name of Amendment Han7eY/O'Brien Request Desch tion/Summar i Bring tun parcels totaling 10 acres into MUSA syste to respon to emergency need to replace a failing on-site ' sewer system. . ' C. Please attach the following: 1. Five copies of the proposed amendment. ' 2. A city-wide map showing the location of the proposed change. 3. The current plan map(s), indicating area(s) affected by amendment. 4. The proposed plan map(s), indicating area(s) affected by amendment. - i ti D. What is the official local status of the proposed amendment? (Check one or more as appropriate.) Acted upon by planning commission (if applicable) on , X Approved by governing body, contingent upon Metropolitan Council review, Considered, but not approved by governing body on Other E. Indicate what adjacent local governmental units and other jurisdictions (school J g 7 ( districts, watershed districts, etc.) affected by the change have been sent copies of the plan amendment, if any, and the date(s) copies were sent to them. None I II. LAND USE ' A. Describe the following, as.appropriate: 1. Size of affected area in acres 10.08 2. Existing land use(s) rural residential 3. Proposed land use(s)urban residential 4. Number and type of residential dwelling units involved two single family hares 5. Proposed density 1.7 units/acre 6. Proposed square footage of commercial, industrial or public buildings None .III. METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT GUIDE A. Population, Household and Employment Forecasts I Will the proposed amendment affect the city's population, household or employment forecasts for 2000, or any additional local staging contained in the original plan? X No/Not Applicable Yes. Describe effect 1 ii �• B. Changes to Urban Service Area Boundary Will the proposed amendment require a change to the boundary of the 1 _ community's urban service area? No/Not applicable. Yes. Under L C., a map should be attached to show the proposed change. C. Changes to Timing and Staging of Urban Service Area Will the proposed amendment require a change to the timing and staging of development within the urban service area? No/Not Applicable. Yes. Under L C., a map should be attached to show the proposed change. D. Wastewater Treatment 1. Will the proposed amendment result in a change in the projected sewer flows for the community? X No/Not Applicable. Yes. Indicate the expected change. ' Total Year 2000/2010 flow for community based on existing plan N/A million gallons/day ' Total 2000/2010 flow for community based on plan amendment N/A million gallons/day ' 2. If your community discharges to more than one metropolitan interceptor, indicate which interceptor will be affected by the amendment. Shorewood Interceptor i 3. Will flows be diverted from one interceptor service area to another? ' X No/Not applicable. Yes Indicate the change and volumes (mgd) involved 1 ' E. Transportation 1. Will the proposed amendment result in an increase in trip generation for ' the affected area? x No/Not applicable. Yes. Describe effect. I 2. Does the proposed amendment contain any changes to the functional _ I classification of roadways? X No. Yes. Describe which roadways F. Aviation Will the proposed amendment affect the function of a metropolitan airport or the compatibility of land uses with aircraft noise? X No/Not applicable. Yes. Describe effect. G. Recreation Open Space Pe ace P 1. Will the proposed amendment have an impact on existing or future I federal, state or regional recreational facilities? X No/Not Applicable. I Yes. Describe effect. H. Housing Will the proposed amendment affect the community's ability or intent to achieve I the long-term goals for low- and moderate-income and modest-cost housing opportunities contained in the existing plan? x No/Not Applicable. • Yes. Describe effect. Water Resources Does the plan amendment affect a wetland? If yes, explain and show location on a map. Yes No. Will the wetland be protected? I Yes. Describe how. No. Describe why not _ I I iv Will the plan amendment result in runoff which affects the quality of any surface water body? If yes, identify which ones. Yes. ' No. Will the water body be protected? ' N/A Yes. Describe how. No. Explain why not. 1 IV. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM A. Official Controls Will the proposed amendment require a change to zoning, subdivision, on-site sewer ordinances or other official controls? ' X No/Not Applicable. Yes. Describe effect. 1 1 I - I/ AUTHORIZATION FORM II We, the undersigned, being fee owners of the following ' described property in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, do hereby petition and request the City Council of the City of , Chanhassen to initiate a public improvement project for the extension of sanitary sewer to service our property. We understand that the extension of sanitary sewer cannot be done I without the consent of the Metropolitan Council to extend the Metropolitan Urban Service Area to encompass our property. We , request the City to process the necessary minor Guide Plan Amendment to accomplish this. , It is further understood that the costs associated with I preparation and processing of the Guide Plan Amendment and the respective costs for the public improvement project are our responsibility. As such, the undersigned waives any and all ' procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments incurred as a part of this project including, but not limited to, , public hearings, notices and the like, and any claims if the special assessments exceed the benefit to the subject property. , The undersigned waives any appeal rights otherwise available I pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429.81. It is understood that the extension of sanitary sewer service to our property cannot be accomplished without the approval of ' the Guide Plan Amendment. I • 111 . €-ECC.-77 7-WP 11 b Pa N G c a3 iktes iN 1 / ii Legal ,pescription " �� � � / y3 L-- 1,t Rd EXee/S t Mit .n533/ ' Property Address DATE: a7,7— 9 D By: ge By: >774.111- , 74-,Ite STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ' COUNTY OF �A�'✓eL )) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ' -?-2^'° day of v'f+2y , 19f , by AL ANA ,Q7,9y E. /./, &✓Ey • _ ELAINE J. ROE3ES' -2,_. 41 `. r,L+ai. NOTARY PJBUC-MINNESOTA , Notary Pub is ;'F,i�„s,, CARVER COUNTY My Commission Expires SEPT.1,19i' DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 11 ( 612) 937-1900 11 -2- I/ AUTHORIZATION FORM _ II We, the undersigned, being fee owners of the following ' described property in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, do hereby petition and request the City Council of the City of I Chanhassen to initiate a public improvement project for the extension of sanitary sewer to service our property. We ' understand that the extension of sanitary sewer cannot be done without the consent of the Metropolitan Council to extend the Metropolitan Urban Service Area to encompass our property. We , request the City to process the necessary minor Guide Plan Amendment to accomplish this. I It is further understood that the costs associated with , preparation and processing of the Guide Plan Amendment and the respective costs for the public improvement project are our , responsibility. As such, the undersigned waives any and all ' procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments incurred as a part of this project including, but not limited to, ' public hearings, notices and the like, and any claims if the special assessments exceed the benefit to the subject property. ' The undersigned waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429.81. It is understood that the extension of sanitary sewer service to our property cannot be accomplished without the approval of ' the Guide Plan Amendment. IF ' Pc.,rml At 2-5-- 00 31 e0 Sect-OZ TL✓P-1 t(, RA 149 -a3 5-47 Acres pe9in at S W co roof of 5(J}''t N WP..) Th tai 7a.6 ' Tk W .200 ' TA S-�-0 3 g,�31 Th S Wt_Y 17R•7 3� Th IA) 10b)1 Th S 3Do� TA £J 145-31 •9h Legal Description I /42-0 Lake Lkcv1 ROAd £xce/Si0b, ills . 5533/ IProperty Address I A q b DATE: z� BY: lg. 610,�..vn.,1,•By: . y: 1/Ll. ��J I STATE OF MINNESOTA ) I ss.) COUNTY OF {-�rmr„.r,,,, ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this I P/Sd- day of .F.e laf var , 1990 . by Terryhe c R. n'h3riP 4,v0 Fl (cP e '(3 ,PV► I1"-r".. CAROL NIESEN � lu NOTARY PUBLIC—MINNESOTA Notary is Z HENNEPIN COUNTY 1 My Commission Expires Feb.16,1995 x IO M.t� t�>r of f re�i K�i K a N S .d Note . The 4 6 a ve. s, h t to yes Are- y y I a t Q WA-101146k Go s f shared artily by p rvJoR-rty Dwier$ C.0 i er . I IDRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 1 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II ( 612) 937-1900 Fc =.y1:-.L= FEB 21199J -2- i;ITY OF CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MARCH 7, 1990 Chairman Conrad called the meeting at 7:35 p.m. . COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steve Emmings, Ladd Conrad, Brian Batzli, Jim Wildermuth and Joan Ahrens I COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Annette Ellson STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner; Don Ashworth, City Manager; Roger Knutson, City Attorney; and Tod Gerhardt, Administrative Assistant. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Boyt and Councilmail Johnson PUBLIC HEARING: , COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO RELOCATE THE METROPOLITAN URBAN SERVICE AREA (MUSA) LINE ON LAKE LUCY ROAD. 1 Public Present: Al Harvey - 1430 Lake Lucy Road , ( Paul Krauss presented the staff report. Chairman Conrad called the public " bearing to order. Al Harvey, 1430 Lake Lucy Road: We did have failing sewer systems due to II the dry weather this winter. Our system did freeze. We have been pumping it to meet satisfaction to the City. My question is, we are ready for sewer. We built in 1965. We told we'd have it in 1975. We would like to II have it. My only question is, I own additional property to the left going out to Yosemite and if I've got to bear the cost of extending this, I would like that property to be included so if in the future time I would rather ' feel I'd want to develop that property. Or at least I would like the condition of the extension to be so that it would adequate serve our properties. We have 11 acres there. The north line is the Metropolitan II Sewer south line up at Yosemite there so I guess I would just like to see, rather than piecemeal just do this little, to satisfy our needs right now, I would question if we could have it extended to take care of the total property there. Conrad: More than likely that, as I'm sure staff has told you or if not, all that area is going to be included in the MUSA line we think relatively I quickly. I think that's what Mr. Krauss was saying. We are extending the MUSA line for service. We believe they'll accept our proposal. Would bundle in all your property and we wouldn't really have to go through what II we're doing right now with you. We really think that that's going to happen. It appears to me that going beyond the immediate problem, solving the immediate problem would be sticky. I Planning Commission Meeting March 7, 1990 - Page 2 't . Krauss: Mr. Chairman, I think you're assessment is probably accurate. In the past the Metro Council has been rather relunctant to grant these sorts of requests. They've often asked the City to delete a corresponding amount of acreage from the MUSA line which we think is an inappropriate thing to do and they often establish a requirement such as we saw on the Shively 11 Addition where no further subdivision is to be allowed that's accessed to sewer until the MUSA line is expanded. You're right, I think bringing in additional properties at this time is likely to raise a lot of eyebrows at ' the Metro Council and probably muddy up the request. Al Harvey: It did state in the thing that we signed our life away to get here, did state that our properties would be encompassed with this extension. • Krauss: If I could clarify that. There's two activities going on here ' concurrently. One in which you're not privy to tonight because it hasn't been done yet is the Harvey/O'Brien request for a feasibility study to extend utilities. Under the feasibility study, the engineering department's going to look at the best way of serving the entire area, not just the two lots that are in this request. That's because we want a system in there that can be extended in the future. However, we didn't feel that we should extend the services to serve anymore than those two ' lots at this time. Conrad: Thank you for your comments. Any other comments? Batzli moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing. All voted ' in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Ahrens: I can go along with the staff recommendation on this one. I don't think it's appropriate right now to, it seems to me that this whole thing arose originally out of failing sewer systems and I don't think it's appropriate at this time to expand beyond the needs of the houses that are there right now. But as far as what's before us on the table right now, I'd go along with the recommendation. Wildermuth: The house was built in 1965. When did our ordinance require 2 ' on site locations for a septic field? Olsen: 1987. Wildermuth: What is the cost of putting in a new septic field? Olsen: I think it can run around $8,000.00. Krauss: To $12,000.00. It's probably roughly equivalent to the cost of extending utilities to the property which, if we were going to do that in a year or two anyway seemed rather redundant. Wildermuth: In view of the emergency situation, it certainly makes sense. I I • Planning Commission Meeting March 7, 1990 - Page 3 . I Batzli: When you put the MUSA line in, how soon do you have to convert from your septic field to the urban service? Krauss: The moving of the MUSA line doesn't in itself require that you convert. The requirement kicks in when the utilities are placed I believe " within 150 feet of your home. Batzli: So that even if they were, if this doesn' t go through and they have to put in the new septic fields and then a year down the road this portion is included within the MUSA line, that wouldn't necessarily mean that they have to hook up. The report seems to state that they're going t save money by doing it this way but that's not necessarily the case. They may be on their septic sewer for years within having to hook up to the urban service. Krauss: Commissioner Batzli , that is a potential. The applicants though I have indicated to us that they'd like to develop the property at some point in the future which is one of the things that we took into consideration. But yeah, there is a potential for redundant service. We don't have any assurance that that's going to occur but there is a good potential for it. Ahrens: How close is the sewer line right now? Isn't it within 150 feet? " Krauss: No. It's several hundred feet to the east. It terminates, I thought we had it illustrated on one of the illustrations. It would terminate right there. Batzli: If in fact the Met Council comes back and says you have to take 1 acres somewhere else out in order to get this through, do you still recommend this? Krauss: I'm not sure Commissioner Batzli. That gets into an equity issue., In the report and in the Metro Council application, we've tried to tell them that we think that that's inappropriate to do. If they want to force that issue I supposed we'll have to deal with it but I really have no idea where those 10 acres would come from. Batzli: I agree with the earlier comments due to the emergency nature of this. I don't think it's appropriate to bring additional acreage in and in fact the Met Council wants to take 10 acres somewhere else out, I think we should review this again. Conrad: Someplace 10 acres out and then where? What did you mean Brian? 1 Batzli: If the Met Council says no you can't service this without taking an additional 10 acres out of the MUSA line. Conrad: The current MUSA line as it stands, okay. Emmings: I kind of agree with Brian's comments. I think it makes a difference to me. I kind of go either way on this one so I decided I was going to support the staff's recommendation here but I tink this one could be handled either way. The only thing I didn't know that I learned tonight, I Planning Commission Meeting - March 7, 1990 - Page 4 is that they wanted to develop the property which makes me want to see the sewer come or make me think that the sewer should be extended. Is there anyway on these kinds of things to get any kind of informa indication from the Met Council ahead of time or is it real unreliable? 11 Krauss: The Met Council is a big bureaucracy that doesn' t like to give any indication of anything. ' Emmings: Some people look at us that way. Krauss: Yeah. I don't know. I've called over there to find out the ' procedure and see if there would be any difficulty with it and I've had differing opinions. Emmings: Do you think that doing this now would have any impact on what we're doing in terms of the big expansion we're going to be requesting very shortly? Krauss: I don' t think so Commissioner Emmings. We've prefaced the whole report by saying that we're relunctant to do this and we've turned away others. It's only the emergency nature of this one that causes us to act a little differently. ' Emmings: My only other comment isn' t really related to this thing but it's more related to the point that Brian raised about whether or not they'd If have to hook up if sewer were available. I thought we had sort of, I know we've discussed in the past the fact that if people have good functioning septic systems, it may not, we may not want to have a policy whereby we require hook-up to sewer even if it is available until there's division of land or the systems fail or whatever. Do we actually have a policy on whether or not people have to hook-up to sewer if it's available? Olsen: Yes. There's an ordinance that states that with sewer and water. Emmings: Okay. Water I understand and what does it say in terms of sewer? ' That you have no choice but to hook up within a certain. . . Olsen: Right. I think it's within, like Paul was saying, within a certain number of feet that you are supposed to hook up. ' Emmings: I think we should probably, that should probably be something that we review at some point. Krauss: It certainly can be. That issue is going to be confronting us probably quite a bit with the expansion of the MUSA. I've seen some I ordinances that were worded that you didn't have to hook up until your system failed or you had to pump it once. You were allowed to pump it once and that was it. There's an equity issue with that and maybe we should take a look at that. Emmings: Otherwise I guess, in balancing all this out, I'd support the staff's recommendation. I I Planning Commission Meeting March 7, 1990 - Page 5 II Erhart: How often do you have to pump it now? I Al Harvey: It's in the winter now it's been every 2 weeks. Erhart: How much does that cost you? f Al Harvey: $65.00 every pump. I might add, why we would like to see the sewer come through is, when we did build we extended our system to the I front thinking that sewer would be coming through along the road. Now we have no accessible area to extend the system that's in there now. In fact we've got drainfields everyplace of ground that's available to us to the II front so that is why we would have liked to have slipped a pipe in when they put the waterline through. Erhart: When did it stop working? When it froze? ' Al Harvey: It's been much worse this winter because of the lack of snow. It does function considerably better in the summer. I Erhart: So it's also marginal in the summertime? Does it work properly then? Al Harvey: It takes in some surface water. To clay around it, it's rather a unique system. It was a filter bed and a drainfield and the clay around it has really kind of saturated or absorbed the. . .and stuff so there isn't " much runoff from the system. So what filters through the filter bed that gets away but it's probably served it's need in 25 years. Erhart: I guess I agree with staff that we ought to go in and see if we II can get in a certain kind of emergency hook-up where they have to do a formal MUSA line amendment. I guess you know better than us on that but i would seem to me that someway to do this without creating too much effort. I assume it's automatic. If Met Council would come back and ask for 10 acres, that would automatically require a major discussion for both the staff and Planning Commission so I assume that's automatic. In that case, we probably would have to live with the situation and try to go for the bi MUSA extension. Conrad: Okay, thanks Tim. I'd be real disappointed if the Metropolitan 1 Council didn't grant this. I agree with the staff report. Is there a motion? Erhart moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Land Use Plan Amendment Request 90-1 to include pro erties located at 1420 and 1430 Lake Lucy Road into the Metropolitan Urban Service' Area and that the Metropolitan Urban Service Area line be amended to include said parcels. All voted in favor and the motion carried.