Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-04-29 Council Minutes CITY OF CORCORAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 29, 2004 1 The Corcoran City Council held a special on April 29, 2004 at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were City Councilors Bucher, Gageby, Guenthner, Lymangood and Thomas, Administrator Vergin, Engineer Vander Top, and Planner Lindahl. Mayor Guenthner called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The Pledge of Allegiance was said. MOTION by Bucher, seconded by Thomas, and carried unanimously to approve the agenda as presented. Open Forum There were no requests from the public to speak during open forum. Concept Utility Reports Engineer Vander Top identified that there were three area utility concept reports, SE, NE, and SW. He would be using the concept report for the SE area as an example. Diane Sommers, resident in audience, questioned what the process would be for public input. Mayor Guenthner informed those present that after information has been presented there would be an opportunity for questions. Engineer Vander Top continued. The report assumes uniformity in the area charges between residential and commercial uses. The land use map was used to formulate information for buildable acres and projected sewage flows. Buildable acres was based on total acres minus wetlands, floodplain, buffers, NRI acres, along with existing residential areas. It has been assumed that existing residential areas will not be expected to connect. Park land was also eliminated from the buildable acreage. Private park land that receives credit towards park dedication would not pay an area charge, private park land that does not receive credit will pay area charges. Right-of-ways were also deducted as unbuildable, leaving a total of 1,382 buildable acres in the SE area, from a gross area of 2,926 acres. Water supply costs are high as the concept plan assumes the city will provide its own water sources, both supply and distribution. The City should evaluate connecting to Maple Grove, Medina and Plymouth for water supply. Transportation costs are based on the Transportation Plan in the Comprehensive Plan. These are the highest infrastructure costs. An assumption has been made that the City will be responsible for 100% of the local collectors, 80% for the realignment of County Roads, and 50% for all other County Road improvements. All actual costs however will likely be determined by the County’s cost sharing program or other agreements at the time of the project. It was questioned why the City would want to put sewer and water to residential areas, why not just to commercial. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Agenda Approval Open Forum Concept Utility Reports Mayor Guenthner responded that the data being presented is to allow them to better understand and CITY OF CORCORAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 29, 2004 2 make the right decision. They need to be equipped to make the right policy decisions through this analysis of information. It is the City’s responsibility to set policies and make decisions. Reviewed cost projections for new development and existing residents. New development cost per unit is $14,617, assuming 3 units per acre. Existing development cost per unit averages to be $46,983, assuming assessment for a full street reconstruction, water supply, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer improvements. The City will work with Municipal Development Group to provide financial analysis which may include various financing options, revenues from increased valuations, how the city will manage shortfalls, usage of TIF funds, and a number of other options that are available to the City. A pavement management plan is currently being prepared. This will identify conditions of existing streets, and provide a timeline for when reconstruction / repairs should be completed. This timeline can tie into the connection to water and sewer services. Each neighborhood will need to be looked at individually. The properties will need to be able to sustain costs, as the City can assess only up to what the actual benefit is. The City will also need to prepare a surface water management plan to more accurately define those costs. Councilor Bucher questioned what and how existing residential would be charged for trunk system area charges of revenues from existing residential were not assumed in the cash flow analysis. Engineer Vander Top responded that the City could not assume that revenues from existing residential properties would be received as some neighborhoods may never connect to public utilities. If existing residential properties would connect in the future, they would be charged the trunk area charge per connection at the City rate. Future area charges would be adjusted to account for the additional revenue. It is anticipated that this adjustment would be minor. Other Cities have also used such revenues towards major maintenance and rehabilitation expenses. Engineer Vander Top identified the next steps to complete the process. ▪ Finalize sewer flows for the Tier II plan ▪ Continue working with Medina for services along Highway 55 ▪ Forward water supply information to the Northwest Metro Water Supply Work Group ▪ Discuss water supply with City of Maple Grove ▪ Prepare Surface Water Management Plan ▪ Complete the Pavement Management Plan ▪ Prepare an Assessment Policy ▪ Hold meetings with existing neighborhoods over the next years to keep them informed of their CITY OF CORCORAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 29, 2004 3 options ▪ Engage Municipal Development Group to further define the financial analysis The Concept Reports are for information purposes and are open to comments. These reports are the basis for preparing the Tier II plan. Council discussion clarified that the reports provide data, and there is no assumption on any given neighborhood. The underlying presumption is that there will not be a cost to existing residents only to development that connects to the infrastructure system. Requested that the report be expanded to include financial options available to the City, and establish criteria that would prompt consideration of infrastructure into an existing neighborhood. Due to a petition received from property owners in the SW district the city council should identify that area as a priority. There is considerable potential for a large tax base from commercial growth in this area that will benefit the entire city. Need to work with Medina and Loretto, perhaps engage the Met Council to look at it as a multi jurisdiction issue. Other option is to look at servicing only with water at this time. Directed Engineer Vander Top to address the immediacy of servicing the SW area and clarify costs to extend outside of the district to connect to Loretto and Medina, bring back to council when revised. Noted that the report needs to emphasize that existing neighborhoods will not carry any costs unless they wish to connect to the system. MOTION by Lymangood, seconded by Gageby, and approved unanimously acknowledging receipt of the report and directing staff to make modifications and add additional information. The Report will be brought back to the Council at a later date for final approval. Engineering Standards Engineer Vander Top informed the council that he is in the process of creating numerous standard detail plates and engineering standards for the construction of infrastructure. Street widths are one part of those details. It was suggested that the standards include a minimum or range for the developer to work with. Through the planning process the developer will be allowed to make requests as to what type of street width standard(s) they will use. The Council concurred that the Fire Departments need to review first from a public safety issue, then the Public Works department, and then the city can review for aesthetics. Acknowledge Receipt of Reports Engineering Standards It was requested that average daily trips be included in the standards, along with cul-de-sac radius, and exclude curb as part of street width. CITY OF CORCORAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 29, 2004 4 The Standards will be brought back to the council at a later date for further review. Infrastructure Policy This is a policy that establishes policies and procedures for the construction of public infrastructure. There are four (4) options outlined in the policy. Option 3- City designs and inspects, Developer contracts and finances; 1- City designs, contracts inspects and finances; 2- City designs, contracts and inspects, Developer finances; 4- Developer designs, contracts and finances, the City reviews and inspects. Engineer Vander Top noted that there can be equal debate for any of the options. His preference is for option 3, as he is more comfortable being involved in the design process, but does not want to get in the way of a developer and their relationship with their engineer, need to partner with the developers assuring a good project for the City. By including all four options the City and the Developer have flexibility and can negotiate compromise. Requested that all options include language regarding financial guarantees to the City, and to strengthen the infrastructure policy by noting part of the Implementation Process referenced in the Comp Plan. MOTION by Lymangood, seconded by Gageby and approved unanimously to recommend adoption of the Statement of Policy, Public Infrastructure Installation, but allow public comment prior to finalizing on May 27, 2004. MOTION by Bucher, seconded by Thomas, and approved unanimously to adjourn, 10:06 p.m. ______________________________ Susan Vergin, City Administrator Additional Review at Later Time Infrastructure Policy Recommend Adoption / Allow Public Comment before Finalizing Adjournment