Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.c. County Road 38 - TH 3 to East Tract Line of Reflections, City Project #393AGENDA ITEM: County Road 38 -TH 3 to East Tract Line of Reflections, City Project #393 AGENDA SECTION: Discussion PREPARED BY Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer AGE I ATTACHMENTS: 1) January 12, 2005 Executive Summary 2) February 1, 2005 Executive Summary 3) February 9, 2005 Executive Summary 4) Map APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: For Discussion CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Work Session Date: April 13, 2005 ISSUE: 1) Consider options for the recovery of project costs associated with the extension of sanitary sewer and water service. 2) Review City code requiring connection to City services BACKGROUND: 1) Project Costs On February 15, 2005, a public hearing for the County Road 38 project was held. At the public hearing, the estimated costs and proposed assessments were presented. The official action by Council was to order the improvements and authorize the preparation of plans and specifications. In addition, Staff was directed to prepare information regarding options for the recovery of costs associated with the extension of sanitary sewer and water service to properties along the north side of County Road 38. For reference, the properties proposed to be assessed for sanitary sewer and water service are shown on the attached map The estimated assessments for each property are as shown on the following page. County Road No 38 (Bonaire Path) Proposed Assessments ?p;, 0 F I i I';ir I iI'II r i, ra,;;t;,;2laet(9iy,x iipll;: r hI' PIN 34- 02010- 010 -06 Joseph B. Pannkuk 13,400.00 PIN 34- 02010 010 -09 William Bonita J Rohr $22,800.00 PIN 34 44300 100 -01 $13,400.00 Todd R. Hendry PIN 34- 44300 040 -02 Tracie L Balsley $13,400.00 PIN 34 44300 010 -02 $13,400.00 Allan F Janet H. Feldsien TOTAL $76,400.00 In addition to the proposed assessments, City and Met Council charges will be collected at the time that a permit is pulled to connect to the City sanitary sewer and water system. These fees (at 2005 rates) are summarized below: Met Council Sewer Access Charge (SAC) City SAC City WAC $1,450 $1,160 $1,410 Other charges (these will vary by property) are associated with contracting a licensed plumber to install the sanitary sewer and water line from the property line to the house and connecting to the house plumbing. As these costs may vary significantly, we do not attempt to estimate these expenses. Attached are copies of executive summaries from previous discussions on this issue. These will provide various options available for Council consideration. To briefly summarize the options that have been discussed, the first option is to levy assessments to the benefiting property owners. These assessments are typically levied over a 10 -year period and are payable with the annual property taxes. The second option is to establish a special area connection charge, in -lieu of special assessments, to be collected at the time a permit is pulled to connect to City sanitary sewer and water service. 2) City Code The current City code requires that properties shall connect to the City sanitary sewer and water system within two -years from the date that service is available. It has been previously discussed that consideration should be given to modifying the City code for this specific area to extend the time period that property owners would have to connect to City 2 services. Staff suggests that this time period be extended between five and ten years and include a provision that should an existing system fail, the property owner shall be required to connect to the City system. SUMMARY: Staff is requesting Council direction on these items. 3 AGENDA ITEM: County Road 38 TH 3 to East Tract Line of Reflections, City Project #393 AGENDA SECTION: Discussion PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P. E., City Enginee EN®, 1r 2 ATTACHMENTS: Map APPROVED BY /17/ RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion Only ACTION: City Council Work Session Date: January 12, 2005 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION ISSUE: Review policy implications associated with proposed improvements on County Road 38 from TH 3 to the east tract line of Reflections and the proposed extension of sanitary sewer and water service to property at 132 Street and Dodd Road and property at 132 Court that is currently zoned rural residential. BACKGROUND: On November 3, 2004, Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report to analyze improvements to County Road 38 from TH 3 to the east tract line of the Reflections development. As part of the Council action, staff was authorized to review the extension of sanitary sewer and water service to the Rose Terrace apartment building located at 132 Street and Dodd Road. At the time that Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report and through the preparation of the feasibility report, several policy implications have been identified. The policy implications that staff reviewed with Council on December 15, 2004, and requested Council direction on are as follows: 1. Extension of sanitary sewer and water service along County Road 38 and the potential levying of special assessments to adjacent benefiting properties on the north side of County Road 38 that are designated transitional residential. As part of the proposed improvements, sanitary sewer and water service will be made available to 3 to 6 existing residential properties on the north side of County Road 38. The transitional residential designation for these properties acknowledges anticipation that City sanitary sewer and water service may be provided. Extension of utilities would require a comprehensive plan amendment to expand the MUSA. The policy consideration for Council is the proposed levy of special assessments to these properties for sanitary sewer and water service that are designated transitional residential. This prompts an additional policy consideration regarding the continued extension of sanitary sewer and water service to the transitional residential area. 2. Extension of sanitary sewer and water service to the Rose Terrace Apartment building located at 132 Street and Dodd Road, SUMMARY: Staff will provide to Council at the meeting the proposed estimated special assessments to these properties for sanitary sewer and water service. The owner of the Rose Terrace apartment building, as noted in correspondence previously provided to Council has requested that sanitary sewer and water service be extended to the property. The property was included in the North Central Sewer Study area for sanitary sewer service. However, the property is currently designated rural residential and is not within the Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) Therefore, consideration to extend sanitary sewer and water service to this property would require a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation and expand the MUSA. A rezoning to urban residential from rural residential would also be required. With the possible extension of sanitary sewer and water service to this property, there may be the potential for additional properties within the current rural residential area to request subdivision and development at an urban density. At the Council Work Session on December 15, 2004, this item was brought before Council to receive direction on these issues. At that meeting Council directed Staff to do the following two items. 1. Contact the property owner of Rose Terrace apartment building to inform them that Council would only consider extending utilities at this time if the owner would fund 100% of the extension. If the owner agrees to fund 100% then Council would review the possible long -range planning ramifications with adjoining property owners. Staff follow -up included sending a letter and phone calls to Wenzel Properties, the owner of Rose Terrace, explaining Council's direction. To date, Wenzel Properties has not replied to the letter or phone calls. 2. Contact the property owners located on 132n Court to determine if there is any interest to extend sanitary .sewer and watermain at the same time improvements are being made to County Road 38. Staff follow -up included inviting all property owners along 132 Court and also property owners along County Road 38 to an open house forum with a roundtable discussion explaining the possible extension of utilities. This open house will occur prior to the Council Work Session. Staff will be prepared to inform Council of the residents' comments and concerns. Staff respectfully requests Council direction on these issues for incorporation into the final feasibility report. 2 fib u;.M ,v 11 W1VUPGp) wola3LYM GL 103PIN nU lllOa H pnai lr r I 3 Hnlnl N3 ro AIN AGENDA ITEM: Receive Feasibility Report/Set Public Hearing- County Road 38 (Bonaire Path) Trunk Highway 3 to East Tract Line of Reflections Street Utility Improvements, City Project #393 AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Andrew J Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer I Thirrei ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, Feasibility Report, Letter APPROVED BY: n, RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE COUNTY ROAD 38 (BONAIRE PATH) TRUNK HIGHWAY 3 TO EAST TRACT LINE OF REFLECTIONS STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT #393 ACTION: BACKGROUND: CITY OF ROSEMOG T EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 1, 2005 On November 3, 2004 the Rosemount City Council authorized the preparation of a Feasibility Report for County Road 38 (Bonaire Path)(CR 38) Street and Utility Improvements. This project has been designated as City Project No. 393. The feasibility study for this project has been before Council at previous work session meetings to discuss policy considerations regarding the extension of City services to properties. At the last Council work session, on January 12, 2005, the direction given to Staff was to omit proposed improvements to 132 Court, provide future expansion of sanitary sewer and watermain west of Trunk Highway 3 (TH3), and to research the possibility of deferring assessments for the sanitary sewer and watermain services that will be provided to properties directly accessing CR 38 as part of the proposed improvements. Since that meeting, the feasibility report has been updated to reflect the necessary changes as directed by Council. Also, Staff has discussed with the City Attorney, options that Council can consider for recovering project costs from benefited property owners. Attached is a copy of a letter from the City Attorney that provides an overview of options that the Council can consider to recover project costs. In the interest of keeping the project on a schedule, it is recommended that Council receive the feasibility report and set the public hearing for February 15, 2005. Prior to the public hearing, at the February 9, 2005 work session, Council will have an opportunity to discuss the options available for recovering project costs. Attached, please find a copy of the Feasibility Report for County Road 38 (Bonaire Path) Trunk Highway 3 to East Tract Line of Reflections Street and Utility Improvements This project consists of the upgrading of existing CR 38 from TH 3 east approximately 2,250 feet to the easterly tract line of the Reflections Development, Utility improvements will consist of trunk and lateral sanitary sewer installation, trunk and lateral watermain installation, and storm sewer installation. A brief review of the proposed improvements and funding is as follows. 1. SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS CR 38 is proposed for complete reconstruction as an urban section roadway with B424 concrete curb and gutter along a revised profile. The new road will be designed to meet State Aid Standards for a 40 mile per hour roadway. It is proposed to be 42 feet in width, and will include a 12 -foot wide thru /right turn lane in each direction and a 14 -foot wide center left turn lane. An additional right turn lane is also proposed for construction for eastbound CR 38 onto southbound Brockway Avenue. An eight -foot bituminous path is proposed for construction on the south side of CR 38. 2. SANITARY SEWER An 18 -inch PVC sanitary sewer trunk main is proposed for construction in CR 38 from the intersection with Brockway Avenue west to TH 3, where it will be stubbed to the north along the eastern TH 3 drainage ditch for future extension. An 8 -inch PVC lateral main is proposed to be jacked west under TH 3 to 132 Street West. An 8 -inch PVC lateral main is also proposed to extend east of Brockway Avenue to provide future service to the properties located to the north and east of the proposed street reconstruction. Sanitary sewer service stubs will be provided to the north at both intersections with 132 Court for future extension. 3. WATERMAIN A 16 -inch DIP trunk watermain is proposed for construction along the entire length of CR 38 and across TH 3 as part of this project. Eight -inch DIP stubs will be placed to the north at each intersection with 132 Court W. for future extension. A 16 -inch DIP watermain will be stubbed to the north along the west side of TH 3 to provide for future service to the north. 4. STORM SEWER New lateral storm sewer will be designed and constructed along the entire length of the project area. Local storm sewer stub pipes will be constructed to the north to drain an existing pond area in the northeast corner of Trunk Highway 3 (TH 3) and CR 38 and to drain an existing closed depression in the rear yard of one of the properties adjacent to the project All storm sewers would meet State Aid and Dakota County Standards and would be in accordance with the City of Rosemount's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan. County Road 38 (Bonaire Path) Street and Utility Improvements Fundin Summa County Road 38 Dakota County $658,200 PIN 34- 02010- 010 -06 Joseph B Pannkuk $13,400 PIN 34- 02010 010 -09 William Bonita J. Rohr $22,800 PIN 34- 44300- 100 -01 Todd R Hendry $13,400 PIN 34- 44300 040 -02 Tracie L. Balsey $13,400 PIN 34- 44300- 010 -02 Allan F Janet H. Fedlsein $13,400 Sanitary Sewer Core Fund $101,700 Waterman Core Fund $208,400 Storm Sewer Core Fund $82,300 City Street Capital Improvement Program (CIP) $450,300 Total $1,577,300 5. PROJECT COST AND FUNDING The estimated construction cost for the CR 38 proposed improvements is $1,577,300 as shown in the following table: The table shows the possible funding sources for the proposed improvements. In accordance with Dakota County's cost participation policy, it is proposed that Dakota County will pay for 55% of the roadway and storm sewer system improvements on CR 38. Properties along the north side of CR 38 with direct access on to CR 38 will be assessed on a per -unit basis. According to the City's 2005 Fee Resolution, a per unit rate of $4,000 is proposed to be assessed to benefiting properties. Additional assessments are proposed for lateral sanitary sewer and watermain service. These proposed assessments have been determined on a per unit basis The City Core Funds would be utilized to fund the trunk sanitary sewer, storm sewer and watermain extensions. The remaining cost is proposed to be funded by the City's Street CIP fund and previous cash deposits by adjacent developers. SUMMARY: Staff recommends Council adoption of a resolution receiving the feasibility report and setting the public hearing for the County Road 38 (Bonaire Path) Trunk Highway 3 to East Tract Line of Reflections Street and Utility Improvements, City Project #393. A RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE COUNTY ROAD 38 (BONAIRE PATH) TRUNK HIGHWAY 3 TO EAST TRACT LINE OF REFLECTIONS STREET UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT #393 WHEREAS, the City Council deemed it necessary and expedient that the City of Rosemount, Minnesota, construct certain improvements, to -wit: City Project #393, County Road 38 (Bonaire Path) Trunk Highway 3 to East Tract Line of Reflections Street Utility Improvements, in the City as described in and in accordance with the feasibility report prepared by the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the City Council has been advised by the City Engineer that said utility and street improvements, City Project #393 is feasible, and should best be made as proposed, and the City Engineer's report to this effect has heretofore been received by Council, and filed with the City Clerk on February 1, 2005; and WHEREAS, the statute provided that no such improvements shall be made until the Council has held a public hearing on such improvements following mailed notice and two publications thereof in the official newspaper stating time and place of the hearing, the general nature of the improvement, the estimated costs thereof, and the area proposed to be assessed, in accordance with the law. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount accepts the feasibility report for City Project #393 and places it on file. NOW THEREFORE IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount that the public hearing be scheduled to consider City Project #393, County Road 38 (Bonaire Path) Trunk Highway 3 to East Tract Line of Reflections Street Utility Improvements, to be held on Tuesday, February 15, 2005 at 7:30 o'clock p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall. ADOPTED this 1 day of February, 2005. ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Seconded by: Voted in favor Voted against: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNES., i A RESOLUTION 2005- William H. Droste, Mayor Kennedy CLL-258220vI RS215 -3 CH AR T E R ED January 19, 2005 Andy Brotzler City Engineer City of Rosemount 2875 145 St. W. Rosemount, MN 55068 470 U S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapotu, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337 -9310 fax hap.//www.kennedy-graven.com CHARLES L. LEFEVERE Attorney at Law Direct Thal (612) 337 -9215 ematl clefevere@kennedy- graven.com Re: Collection of Special Assessments for Sewer and Water Protect Dear Andy: You have asked for a letter describing the options available to the City to finance sewer and water project costs by current or deferred special assessments. The most common procedure, of course, is to require the payment of the costs of extending sewer and water service to property through the collection of special assessments at the tune service is provided The impact of such special assessments can be reduced by extending the term of payment of the assessments. State law authorizes special assessments to be deferred only in limited circumstances. One is that special assessments on unimproved property may be deferred under Minn. Stat. §429.061, Subd 2 In the case of improved property, the statutes authorize deferment of special assessments only m the case of properties owned by senior citizens or disabled persons. Minn Stat. §435.191 If a City Council decides that it does not want to collect the costs of such projects from benefited properties at the current time, but wishes to collect at a later time, it may collect the charges as a connection charge at the time the property is connected to sewer and water service. Ordinarily, connection charges are unposed only to recover the costs incurred by the City m permitting and overseeing the connection of the property to public facilities. However, State law authorizes connection charges to be adjusted to take into consideration the payment (or non payment) of special assessments at an earlier date. Specifically, Minn Stat. §444.075, Subd. 3, provides in part that "Charges for connections to the facilities may in the discretion of the governing body be fixed by reference to the portion of the cost of connection which has been paid by assessment of Andy Brotzler January 19, 2005 Page 2 the premises to be connected in comparison with other premises, as well as the cost of making or supervising the connection The disadvantage of collecting these charges as connection charges in the future is that the City must carry the costs until connection In some cases, connection may not occur for a substantial period of time, and may never occur unless connection is compelled by an ordmance or the water or septic systems on the property fail It is common for cities to require properties to be connected to sewer and water within a specified time after service is made available to the property. It seems to me that such an ordinance serves two purposes. The first is that connection to a municipal water supply and sanitary sewer system protects the public health and environment. The second is that reasonably prompt connection to the system will facilitate payment for both the construction and operation of the facilities. If the City Council wishes to collect for the cost of the project through a connection charge, it would be necessary to amend the City's connection charge policies and rates so that properties that were not previously subject to special assessments would be required to pay those costs at the time of connection. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Very truly yours, Charles L. LeFevere CLL peb RS215 -3 cu.- 258220v1 AGENDA ITEM: County Road 38 TH 3 to East Tract Line of Reflections, City Project #393 AGENDA SECTION: Discussion PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P. E., City Engin r` AGED 2 ATTACHMENTS: Letter from City Attorney APPROVED BY: NOTES: For Discussion Only. 1/ ISSUE: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Work Session Date: February 9, 2005 Review and discuss the options available for recovering project costs from benefiting properties along the project corridor. BACKGROUND: On November 3, 2004 the Rosemount City Council authorized the preparation of a Feasibility Report for County Road 38 (Bonaire Path)(CR 38) Street and Utility Improvements and on February 1, 2005 Council received the feasibility report and ordered the public hearing for February 15, 2005. This project has been designated as City Project No. 393. The feasibility study for this project has been before Council at previous work session meetings to discuss policy considerations regarding the extension of City services to properties. At the last Council work session, on January 12, 2005, the direction given to Staff was to omit proposed improvements to 132 Court, provide future expansion of sanitary sewer and watermain west of Trunk Highway 3 (TH3), and to research the possibility of deferring assessments for the sanitary sewer and watermain services that will be provided to properties directly accessing CR 38 as part of the proposed improvements. Since that meeting, the feasibility report has been updated to reflect the necessary changes as directed by Council. Also, Staff has discussed with the City Attorney, options that Council can consider for recovering project costs from benefited property owners. Attached is a copy of a letter from the City Attorney that provides an overview of options that the Council can consider to recover project costs. SUMMARY: Staff respectfully requests Council direction for recovering project costs from benefiting properties along the County Road 38 proposed improvements project. Kennedy CLL- 258220v1 R2215 -3 CH AR T E R ED January 19, 2005 Andy Brotzler City Engineer City of Rosemount 2875 145 St. W. Rosemount, MN 55068 U S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337 -9300 telephone (612) 337 -9310 fax htcp-//www.kennedy-graven.com CHARLES L. LEFEVERE Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337 -9215 email: clefevereGia kennedy- graven com Re: Collection of Special Assessments for Sewer and Water Project Dear Andy: You have asked for a letter describing the options available to the City to finance sewer and water project costs by current or deferred special assessments. The most common procedure, of course, is to require the payment of the costs of extending sewer and water service to property through the collection of special assessments at the time service is provided. The impact of such special assessments can be reduced by extending the term of payment of the assessments. State law authorizes special assessments to be deferred only in limited circumstances. One is that special assessments on unimproved property may be deferred under Minn Stat. §429.061, Subd 2. In the case of improved property, the statutes authorize deferment of special assessments only in the case of properties owned by senior citizens or disabled persons. Minn. Stat. §435.191. If a City Council decides that it does not want to collect the costs of such projects from benefited properties at the current time, but wishes to collect at a later time, it may collect the charges as a connection charge at the time the property is connected to sewer and water service. Ordinarily, connection charges are imposed only to recover the costs incurred by the City in permitting and overseeing the connection of the property to public facilities. However, State law authorizes connection charges to be adjusted to take into consideration the payment (or non payment) of special assessments at an earlier date. Specifically, Minn. Stat. §444.075, Subd. 3, provides in part that "Charges for connections to the facilities may in the discretion of the governing body be fixed by reference to the portion of the cost of connection which has been paid by assessment of Andy Brotzler January 19, 2005 Page 2 the premises to be connected in comparison with other premises, as well as the cost of malting or supervising the connection." The disadvantage of collecting these charges as connection charges in the future is that the City must carry the costs until connection. In some cases, connection may not occur for a substantial period of time, and may never occur unless connection is compelled by an ordinance or the water or septic systems on the property fail. It is common for cities to require properties to be connected to sewer and water within a specified time after service is made available to the property It seems to me that such an ordinance serves two purposes. The first is that connection to a municipal water supply and sanitary sewer system protects the public health and environment. The second is that reasonably prompt connection to the system will facilitate payment for both the construction and operation of the facilities. If the City Council wishes to collect for the cost of the project through a connection charge, it would be necessary to amend the City's connection charge policies and rates so that properties that were not previously subject to special assessments would be required to pay those costs at the time of connection. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Very truly yours, Charles L. LeFevere CLL:peb RS215 -3 CU,258220v1 t-4 MST ST A WSB c Associates. Inc "pi ■410 1 1 mi■ 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 30D Minneapolis, MN 55416 www wsbeng com 763-541 Fax 763441 1700 6FRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING PLANNING CONSTRUCTION 4 101 591-011FEASSFIG_01 dveg, 1 /2A2005 a 43 4 AM 132ND ST 1M COUNTY ROAD NO 3W ---4 0 I V i z C -71 .4.., k 1 E I /7 I 0 C j _-44 J=1E1] r 0 CONNEMARA 159_ r LOWER 138111 ST AM 1' 138751 ST W I UPPER 138TH ST 10 1391. ST la E ES 140714 ST W 7 7 34_ *126114 sr z• I I V‘ 141 A 13.7.17_.•_,,l_i,./i 1 t 130111 ST 44 I /3 L 1-- 4 KEEGAN LAKE PROJECT SITE r #)4 44 7 JAff311 ST W jj lame sT w CONNEMARA BIRMINGRAM CT 138Th ST ab nom c 4orf L ORLFAST CT H PROJECT LOCATION COUNTY ROAD NO. 38 IMPROVEMENTS SROSEMOUNT MINNESOTA WSB Project No 1591-01 February 1, 2005 Figure No. 1