Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout81-085 . . , c ~ (..(/...1.1..-_1.<4.,0.- '. ,.... I", 7 - ,"" -dJl'~' . .. '.' &.-...,#...~..-,.~._~' " ,1.< .-'....,~ V ;....,.......-oe..? - .; ~u, cF/-J>tJ- Extract of Minutes of Meeting of City Council ' City of Arden Hills Ramsey County, Minnesota November 30, 1981 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, was held in the City Hall in said City on Monday, November 30, 1981, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. The following members were present: Mayor Woodburn and Councilmen Johnson, McAllister and Hollenhorst; and the fol- lowing was absent: Councilman Wingert~ Also present were Donald Lamb, City Treasurer; Donald Christoffersen of Short-Elliott-Hendrickson, Inc., City Engi- neers; Dorothy Zehm, Deputy Clerk; and Peter S. Popovich of Peterson, Popovich, Knutson & Flynn, City Bond Consultant. MAYOR WOODBURN: The next hearing is for Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-81-3. It will be explained in detail in a moment. Mrs. Zehm, do you have the affidavit of publication? MRS. DOROTHY ZEHM: It was published in the New Brighton Bulletin on November 19 and 26, 1981. We also have theCer- tificate of Mailing on file. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: This improvement was initiated pri- marily by the Arden Oaks Addition and it includes sanitary sewer, watermain, and construction of streets and some storm drainage. There are some problems, in this rather isolated piece of property, whereby watermain has to be extended through the property, as well as sanitary sewer and a street. I'll start with the streets. To begin with, it will be typical seven ton design streets, concrete curb and gutter, 34 feet wide. It's proposed to improve Wesley Avenue from County Road E to Arden Oaks Drive. This is an existing right-of-way, somewhat of a thoroughfare - some type of street - there's a driveway at this end of it. This would be all constructed by the developer, as far as grading and such in this area and in the Arden Oaks development. It includes the construction of Arden Oaks Drive in a circular manner, back out to Old Highway 10. Proposed sanitary sewers to this point on wesley to . serve not only the development, but two potential lots in this area and perhaps some property in this area, although this is low and it's questionable whether or not it can be developed. Sanitary sewers would run along the center of the streets, roughly speaking, in a westerly direction back to Old Highway 10, under Old Highway 10 to the west side. Also, sanitary sewer is proposed to be constructed on the west side of 10. There's a piece of property in here that is not currently being served by sanitary sewer. This sanitary sewer would drain in this direction and at this point it is proposed to install a sanitary sewer pumping station to pump the sewage in from a low area, back down southerly to the existing sanitary sewer along County Road E. It is proposed to construct water- main on Wesley Avenue beginning at County Road E, along the streets in the development, around the development, again back out to Old Highway 10, and up on the left side of Old Highway 10 and crossing southerly across County Road E and making the connection to the existing watermain. Thus, we're making the large loop that's required. Additional internal drainage would include storm sewer construction, drainage out to the north towards the Soo Line Railroad to the proposed storm water detention basin, which would be constructed by the developer. Also, another storm sewer beginning at the. low area just on the west side of wesley Avenue, north of County Road E, Which would commence northerly at Arden Oaks Drive, around to the east end of Arden Oaks Drive and then draining northeasterly to another storm water deten- tion basin which ultimately drains to the Soo Line Railroad, which ultimately drains to the west and then crosses northerly under Old Highway 10 to Bethel College and Valentine Lake. Points of interest - in addition to the heavy dark line that you'll notice here is the outline of the proposed Arden Oaks Development. There are other parcels of property that may utilize the facilities being constructed. I neglected to point out here that sewer and water are being constructed north to this al1ea,primarily to serve this particular lot and house, and a potential lot to the east of that existing house. This is not part of the development. It could potentially be served by sewer and water with what is being proposed, as well as this property in this location and, although it's not drawn on this map, there are two lots developed in this area that can be served by this proposed improvement. I believe that completes it, your Honor. . MR. POPOVICH: Mayor and members of the Council, the total estimated cost of this project is $648,935.00. Of that, the Arden Oaks Addition portion is estimated at $466,035.00. The balance of the improvement would be on Wesley Avenue and portions of Pascal and Old Highway 10. $207,710.00 would be the cost of the sanitary sewer, $141,960.00 for watermain, $252,820.00 for street, and $46,445.00 for storm drainage. Depending on where the lots are, there are different amounts that will be assessed. Assuming it's 100% assessed, if a lot 2 . gets sanitary sewer, that assessment cost will be $4,830.00; watermain will be $3,301.00; street will be $6",320.00: and storm sewer will be $1,161.00; so if you got all of that, the total cost would be approximately $15,612.00 per lot. As I remember from the feasibility report, there are about 43 lots that receive that type of improvement. It would be our recom- mendation that for those - assuming the assessment - that we ought to not assess over longer than a 15 year period because of present market conditions. But for that portion that lies within the addition, because it's totally a developer matter, the Council may wish to consider a development agreement where those total assessments are paid in a three to five year period. I don't know if the developer is here, but that is one item that you ought to consider because it does affect the amount of financing you do and how fast (inaudible) in the actual development itself. If's possible to have different assessment formulas within the same improvement because of the difference between where there are existing properties as compared to those that are being requested by the development agreement. Assuming it is assessed, as the greater portion of the project will be, and we're assuming 100% assessment here unless there are some allowances that the Council makes at the assessment hearing, that will be spread over a period of time determined by the development agreement, or not to exceed 15 years at the maximum interest rate, which would be 1% more than the bond issue or not more than 12%, as permitted by the Local Improvement Code. Assuming the project is done in 1982, we will hold our assessment hearing next fall and collections should commence in 1983. This is one of the projects thatwoulq be included in the proposed bond issue if it was approved and you decided to go ahead. That issue is scheduled for sale in late January or early February. MAYOR WOODBURN: Mr. Christliffersen, 43 lots were men- tioned as possible assessable lots, or involved lots. Which ones are in the development? Do you have those figures with you? . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The lots within the development are outlined by a heavy. dark line and there are five or six po- tential lots outside, depending on how the property is divided. When I say five or six, there are two potential lots here, two or three along the east side of Old Highway 10, and that depends strictly on the development and, the way the land is divided. There is a long, deep lot which exists as one lot right now and there's potential for another redivision of this land, creating a lot fronting on Arden Oaks Drive. Currently that is counted as one. That number could be changed though. MAYOR WOODBURN: Mrs. Zehm, are there any written com- ments on the development? 3 MRS. ZEHM: No, I have not received any. MAYOR WOODBURN: I will open the public hearing. The developer is here if you would to make any comments. . MR. CURT LAUGHINGHOUSE, Derrick Land Company: We did petition for the improvements within Arden Oaks and we do hope they will be improved and put upon the program for next summer and be financed as a public improvement, as we have requested. One thing I was surprised at, and it's not a great deal, but I was surprised at the size of the section and I guess I need to ask Mr. Christoffersen - the size of the road section - is that 34 feet back to back or inside the faces? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Face to face. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: So it's even greater, 35 feet perhaps, back to back. When I say back to back, I mean back of curb to back of curb. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Back of curb - it would be closer to 35, 35 1/2. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: That's just a bigger section than what I'm accustomed to, but if that's the City standard, that's just fine. Mr. Popovich did refer to the terms of assessment. That is, whether its 15 years or three or five or otherwise. We would prefer longer assessments - it makes it much more reasonable for - of course, this will be settled next fall. As you can imagine, these lots will not necessarily sellout immediately, and the better terms that can be available, the easier it will be on the ultimate consumer of the lots. Other- wise, I'd be glad to answer any questions. . MR. POPOVICH: On that point, he indicated he could wait with the development agreement until the assessment hearing. From our point of view, assuming we sell bonds in a month or two, if you're going to have a development agreement, we should know that now, because in the bond prospectus that goes out we could then indicate that there would be some $466,000.00 of $648,000.00 that would be paid over a three to five year period because of the terms of the development agreement. That affects whether we go with long term financing or short term financing because obviously, if the people who are going to bid on the bonds know that so much of it is going to be paid within a certain period of time - that's going to affect your interest rates. So we can't wait until the' assessment hearing next fall. That's something that the Council and the attorney and the developer should get together on before we advertise for bond bids. I just wanted to say that so Curt would know where I come from right now, not next year. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: I didn't realize that. We'd be happy to work that out. 4 MAYOR WOODBURN: (Inaudible) in January. . MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: We can work on it right away. MAYOR WOODBURN: It should be one of our items on the agenda hopefully in January. MR. JOHN ECKERT, 3620 North Pascal: As it's been ex- plained here, there are going to be no improvements to North Pascal. Is that correct? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: There is a potential - not along Pascal itself - a potential turn-around at the north end of it. An emergency vehicle turn-around. I didn't discuss that. That's part of the proposed improvement - part of the cost as in the proposed improvement is to 'provide what we call a haIlUllerhead-typeturn-around - just a "T" - for emergency vehicles to turn around. Relocation of a hydrant. That's the extent of the construction. MAYOR WOODBURN: Any more questions or COIlUllents? MR. MAX STOUTENBURG, 1435 West County Road E: In regard to the lot size - the lot size is going to be quite a bit larger than what the existing lot sizes are in the other area. For instance, my lot there in the corner is 75 by 168, I believe, and I don't know what the others are, but you get up into that other area there and the lots look like they're twice the size of what the normal lot size is. Is this standard procedure for the Village - to put that size lots in there? And again, what kind of housing is going to go in there when they build the houses? Are these lots just going to go up for sale and the owner has the choice of picking the type of housing that goes in there or are you actually going to build the houses and sell them as lots and houses? Are you going to sell the lots or lots and houses? What kind of housing can we expect in there? Are they going to be in the $100,000 category? If you build a $100,000 house right behind my house, my property values are going to drop. That's what'I'm con- cerned about. . MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: Our firm does not build this kind of single family home: We have developed - just to give you some kind of idea - we have developed, in the last three years I'll go through it real quickly - in Lake Elmo, 150 single family lots; in Mendota Heights, 40 some; Apple Valley, 70 some; Minnetonka, well over 100; Wayzata, 20; all single family. In Minnetonka we have also developed a couple of duplex lots - seven in fact. In Coon Rapids we have 114 lots of singles and quads. The only construction our company has ever done has been on the duplex lots in Minnetonka. Generally, our plan - first of all, we sell them to make the most money (inaudible). Generally, our plan has been to sell these to individual purchasers. In the past, that's what we've done. We have also usually - and ,at this point I don't want to say we're going to - but we usually put covenants on the property 5 . so that an architectural control committee within our company controls the arChitecture, or the design, of the house. As to the dollars question, I doubt very much that anything on there could be built for less than $100,000, or probably $140,000 or $150,000 or $160,000. We sincerely hope that it will be in that range, or more, .because the lots are going to have to be priced at $25,000 and up. One doesn't build $100,000 homes - that's probably the minimum that you can build on a $25,000 lot. I don't anticipate devaluating the properties around it at all. I don't mean to sound elitist - I think we're going to do a good job of controlling the architecture. However, we will not - I strongly doubt that we'll be building the homes. That is not our custom. MAYOR WOODBURN: Another question I can perhaps answer here - this is a residential zone-and this type of zone, 95 feet is the minimum lot that would be allowed - 14,000, plus or minus, square feet. MR. STOUTENBURG: Isn't that quite a bit more from what our standard lots are there? MAYOR WOODBURN:. Perhaps more than what yours is, but not in an R-l zone -it's 85 feet, I believe, in R-2; 95 feet, I believe, in R-l. Your lots were designed a while before the zoning was in, I'm sure. I would like to just vaguely comment on something else you said - I think the general experience is, when new, expensive houses are built in a neighborhood like this, that it helps the housing value. MR. STOUTENBURG: It helps their housing value. MAYOR WOODBURN: No, yours. I think that is what is generally found. I'm not a realtor -somebody else might want to comment on that too. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: I did remember another question the gentleman asked - the lots on the east side are extra large. The reason is that the land along the east side is quite low. It's sort of an extension of that pond that's up on the north- east corner. That is the reason that they are larger lots. It's not possible to move the road to the east and put more lots in. We have put the lots in, more or less to the stand- ards of the City - minimum standards of the City. Again, what the Mayor said, 95 foot frontage and so many square feet. . MR. STOUTENBURG: When you go through a project like this, do you level off all the trees or are you going to leave most of the oak trees that are in that area back there and let the homeowner that buys the lot determine how many trees he wants to cut down? MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: Same answer. A modern developer is not like the developer in the 1950's. We all learn, I guess. Not that I was a developer ,in the 1950's, but we don't clear 6 . the land and put the streets in straight - not at all. We've made an effort ,here to put the roads where the'terrain tells us, so there's minimum grading. We also, you'll notice, between the two cul-de-sacs - that's where the woods are - we put a minimum of streets in there. An older plan that was proposed for this land - the former owners put across - had a full loop road there and we cul-de-saced for the very reason you mention - preserve trees. We intend to preserve trees just as much as we can. They're valuable to us as sales tools. We wouldn't cut down a tree - in fact, very frequently I go through and work with the people who are marking the trees and if there's one on the line - leave it. Then we go back and when we try to pave the darn thing and grade for sewer, we have to take another tree. We keep it to a minimum when we can. MAYOR WOODBURN: Mr. Christo~fersen, in the feasibility report, how much grading is anticipated in the road? Do you have any idea of any grading that might go on? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The grading is being covered by the developer - they'll do the grading. I believe that he should address that question about how much. Under general improve- ments with a developer, the way the City has operated in the past, the developer performs a site grading to his specifica- tions and then the City builds the street to match the grade that he grades. That seems to work out much better. As Mr. Laughinghouse indicated, he is ready to conduct his grading operation to preserve as many trees as possible. Obviously, I think that in any grading operation, as far as trees and as far as the street is concerned, you can expect at least the right- of-way to be cleared of trees. MR. WALTER DUNNETT, 1541 Oak Avenue: When you say lot - would that be the 95 foot expanse? MR. POPOVICH: An average lot. MR. WALTER DUNNETT: Our property is running along the left side - the west side of old Snelling there - we have that land and the pond in there and the railroad tracks. So it's probably roughly 300 feet of land, I guess, plus the pond. So I'm obviously interested in what we're talking about there. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: He could develop three lots. There would be three unit assessments across that property. . MR. DUNNETT: If you develop two, they'd obviously be bigger, but would that be two unit assessments or would it still be for 95 or 100 feet or whatever it is? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I suppose that would be two. I guess it's a question of how many on the frontage and the character. By the time you get into this area here, it's getting rather low. 7 MR. DUNNETT: Is it physically possible to make three lots out of that? . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: It's physically possible. I believe it would be recommended to assess for three lots. If it isn't physically possible to make three lots, the other recommenda- tion would be for two. MR. DUNNETT: That would be sewer and water, not street? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Right. MR. DUNNETT: there on an angle. side of the pond. That sewer line is coming under the road That would, I assume, come in on the south MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: This is the pond, roughly. It would be in the location - somewhere in this vicinity - you would probably have to get some type of an easement to place a sewage pumping station in that location. I believe the right- of-way is very restricted there because they've widened the road so much. So it's really the only logical place that we have to locate a sewage pumping station. This site is loaded with utilities right now. MRS. DONNA HATCH, 3632 North Pascal: You're talking about putting in all of these sewers and stuff - how will that affect us? We have our sewer, our water, our stree't. Will we be assessed for any of this? I know there has to be some kind of sewer thing (inaudible). What's going to happen? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Can you show me where that would be? MRS. HATCH: I live in the last house on the right. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: It appears that you have sewer and water facilities. MRS. HATCH: We have a deadend watermain. . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That's correct. That would continue as such. There would be no proposal to carry that through and make a loop out" of that system. The only question that the Council may wish to consider is the assessment for the improvement of the turn-around on the end. I don't know how that would be spread up and down the property line. That's the only potential. I guess that cost was just added into the overall road construction cost. We did not assume, in our report, any unit assessment being on Pascal Avenue. There again, that's something the Council would have to consider at the time of the assessment hearing. MR. POPOVICH: Let's point that out. They are included in the improvement hearing, but they weren't computed a cost on the big lot size. The north end of Pascal Avenue does have 8 . some street costs and a watermain cost in there that could be spread and the total amount of it is small,but it is something that could be, depending on the assessment hearing, spread between "E" and up Pascal. The full amount. of it, the engi- neer can.'t tell us at this time because it is a very nominal portion of the overall $648,000. If you look at your feasi- bility report, I think on page 6, there's a cost of $1500.00, or something like that in there - page 6 of your summary of costs -there's a cost in there for the north end of Pascal Avenue. I just didn't want the people to think there was going to be no cost at all. Obviously, you wouldn't be assessed again for sewer and water if they already have it, but if there has been some sort of improvement and they get a benefit, that would come up at the assessment hearing. MAYOR WOODBURN: Mr. Popovich likes to leave all of his avenues open. The assessment hearing, of course, will occur at some later date, after the project. MAN FROM AUDIENCE: Maybe we should include repainting the deadend street signs so we wouldn't have so much traffic. WOMAN FROM AUDIENCE: Yes. Do something about those dead- end street signs. MAYOR WOODBURN: myself and I think it is there. Yes, I know. I live on the end of one invites people to come down to see what MAN FROM AUDIENCE: To see what a deadend looks like. -r~ ~ STOUTENBURG, JR., 1435 West County Road E: What's .considered a low. lying area? I do a lot of cross country skiing back there and I've noticed on lots 5 and 6 that there's a pond in there that has about five feet of water in it at one time, but this past surnme~ it was all dried up. I noticed you don't have that shown as a low lying area. The developer said, I think, that the development on - I can't read it very well - 11 and 12 there and 1 and 2 over there - they don't know if they're going to develop there. I was assuming that 5 and 6 were the same as 11 and 12 and 1 and 2. MAYOR WOODBURN: This 5 and 6 - there are two of them up there. The northern 5 and 6? . MR. STOUTENBURG: Yes. (Inaudible). There!s a low lying area that has had five feet of water in there at one time. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: He is correct. There is a small, intermittent pond - it might be more like 6 and 7 - but it's in that neighborhood. That would be filled. I do have the preliminary plans which, maybe after the meeting, we can talk with the neighbors and show them all the details that you've been over in past meetings. 9 MAYOR WOODBURN: I think they deserve to see it. Maybe you would want to show them - we could put it up here. . MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: I hope everyone can see this. The lighter lines are the topography that is in place and ,the darker lines are grading that we're going to accomplish. As an example, from here - Snelling - there would be a cut along the road and, in partial answer to the tree question, we will leave this slope as steep as we can, leaving as many trees as we can. The ultimate home buyer/builder will set out the trees and driveway as necessary. When you come around here, this gets into a fill. This is the pond that you mentioned. There will be some fill around here. Then here, this is where there is a sharp slope here - we intend to fill back this far and,these become (inaudible) all backing up on the pond. The actual pond is right in here. When I talked about this being low, it's only low to where the road is. So in order to - if we wanted to actually improve this or put a cul-de-sac down here or something like that - it would take an immense amount of grading, and we're just not going to do that. This is going to remain larger lots. (Inaudible conversation between those looking at the map.) A little bit of grading here and a little bit of grading to accomplish this road. Now, the tree line is right here, so the edge of the roadway goes right up the tree line here - I hope everyone can see that - and, of course, we have to cut through the trees right here. We cut out this section of the road just for that reason, plus we like cul-de-sac lots - deadend lots. MAYOR WOODBURN: I recognize this isn't really part storm sewer, etc., but we'll still answer any questions. further questions? of the Any MR. ADOLPH MILLER, 3609 North Pascal: Why couldn't we put up a deadend street there and save that extra assessment? MAYOR WOODBURN: Deadend street on Wesley? MR. MILLER: On Pascal. . MAYOR WOODBURN: Well, it's a deadend without the hammer- head. We haven't said there would be an assessment for that. There could be, perhaps. There are several reasons that this has" been considered to be put in. One of them is fire protec- tion. They don't like things where they can't back up and get out of the way - get trapped, and things like this. The second reason for it is snow storage. Those are"two that I can think of right off hand. MR. MAX STOUTENBURG, 1435 West County Road E: a limited time, once they develop this land, before housing and stuff has to be built in there? or can it and ten years later maybe the final housing will in there? Is there all the he develop be buil t 10 MAYOR WOODBURN: That's right. . MR. STOUTENBURG: So just because they're going through and putting this - first they want to sell the lots and if they sell a lot, someday somebody can build on it, but I've seen some lots where five people will go and buy a lot and just keep it for a lot - they never do build on it. MAYOR WOODBURN: There's not too much we can do about that. We can't force somebody into something. MR. STOUTENBURG: When that project originally started, I was thinking a developer was going to go in there and actually build the houses and the whole works and just sell the houses and the lots all together. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: May I speak to that, Mr. Mayor? In the first place, all the lots that are in place are part of the plat that was platted in the 1930's. That plat goes right across our property. In other words, if you stay after this hearing, we'll get some more maps up here - this road, although it's only paved to here, is platted and the City owns the road all the way straight up to here, it runs around here, and it's platted and comes right back down. There are lots - here's one of them - and they run right straight up there and they stack right up here and so forth; Those lots that are under there have been there since the 1930's. Nobody can force a developer to build a house. But, a lot of money has gone into this already and more money is going to go into it and assess- ments will have to be paid, so if pressured - there will be pressure for it to be developed. MR. going to going to STOUTENBURG: have to listen have to listen I guess my concern is - how long to hammers pounding back there? to it for ten years? amI AmI MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE:: I sure wouldn't want to promise. You're right - someone may buy a lot for the investment. In Mendota Heights, a party bought two lots - built a house on one and within a year they sold the other lot for a profit. MAYOR WOODBURN: Pretend they're woodpeckers. MR. STOUTENBURG: If the price of fuel keeps going up, I'll buy the lot just for the wood. . MR. POPOVICH: I hope we don't run into this too much, because some of us can remember in St. Paul - in the Highland Park area - they put in streets, curbs, gutters and everything and it all went tax delinquent. That whole Highland Park area. The City ended up selling lots at tax forfeited sale. When you go back in history, you can have some situations that are bad examples of what could happen. 11 MAYOR WOODBURN: Over-extension. I guess we can't tell somebody how to run their business. . MRS. RHODA BEHR, 1401 West County Road E: We live on the corner of County Road E and Wesley. This new road is going right down the side of our house. We don't need that road. We have a road in front 0 f our house. We won I t go down that road. Will we be assessed for that road since it's going right down the side of our lot? MAYOR WOODBURN: On the lot that that house stands on, there are no improvements going in that improve your property. In other words, you have water, you have sewer. MRS. BEHR: the side of our will we? I'm talking about the road that's going down house. We won't be assessed for the road, MAYOR WOODBURN: I can't answer that because this ,isn't the assessment hearing, but the general rule, as Mr. Popovich keeps telling us, is that if property is improved by an improve- ment, you can assess it. If it's not improved, you can't. Normally, (inaudible) roads and things like this are not con- sidered an improvement to the property, at least not like a road that serves them. MRS. BEHR: I was once told that once you pay your assess- ments, you're not taxed again for them. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: Unless they have new ones and they redo the road. MAYOR WOODBURN: You were never assessed for County Road E. MRS. BEHR: No. MAYOR WOODBURN: I haven't answered your question and I don't think I can at this point. Are there any other ques- tions? If there are no more questions about this, we will close the public hearing, and go on to any questions that the Council may have. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: How far are we supposed to go on this tonight? On the agenda here it says "ordering prepara- tion of plans and specifications". I'm concerned about the . developer's agreement. MR. POPOVICH: Obviously, if the Council orders the improvement tonight, you would order it and then plans and specs would be prepared for bid letting. Between now and the time we sell bonds would be for the formulation of the develop- ment agreement that you negotiate with the developer. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER:. We don't need that first? 12 . MR. POPOVICH: You don't need it first. You're leverage is - if he doesn't agree with you, you don't order the plans and specs to be advertised. Obviously, if the development agreement was done now - assuming the improvement went ahead - you'd know what it was. I don't know what else you want to put in a development agreement because there are a number of things that do go into it that your counsel recommends. But if we ordered the improvement, then he started on plans and specs to call for bids, we wouldn't have to approve the plans and call for the bids - because 'that's additional cost - until that development agreement is in place. MAYOR WOODBURN: In this case, ordering the improvement is similar to ordering the plans and specifications. In this type of situation, a possible assessment situation, we have different terminology. MR. on this? normally tioned. POPOVICH: Mayor, may I ask - do we have a petition The reason I ask, I notice Maurice just left and you need four votes and then three if it's 35% peti- MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: We did petition MR. POPOVICH: I want the record to show - Mr. Laughing- house, who controls more than 35% of the affected property - your company - petitioned for it. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: Yes sir. MAYOR WOODBURN: Is it 35%? MR. POPOVICH: 35% of the affected property within the improvement. Obviously, there's more land than just his, but it's obvious, when you look at his addition compared to the others, that's more than 35%. That permits you to go ahead with three votes out of'five instead of four out of five. MAYOR WOODBURN: Any questions from the Council? I have another question or two of Mr. Popovich. You indicated that assessments can proceed for various years. Can they be done in various manners on different parcels - lots, for instance, within an improvement, and linear footage without? . MR. POPOVICH: Yes. So long as you arrive at what you feel is the increased market value due to the benefits. We come back to that old rule again. Formulas are only a way to get at the benefit. You can use any kind of a formula or approach, so long as the property is benefitted accordingly. MAYOR WOODBURN: I don't,think I have any more questions. Mr. Popovich and Mr. Christoffersen have nothing, more to add, I gather, at this point. We have at.this point our options - we can continue this for another meeting, we can order the improvement, or we can say no to the whole project. 13 . . . ' . COUNCILMAN McALLISTER then introduced the, following resolu- tion and moved its adoption: Resolution No. 81-85 RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-W-P-ST-81-3 UNDER AND PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 429 BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, that in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1961, Chapter 429, as amended, the Council held a public hearing on the proposed construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-81-3, consisting of the installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, bituminous paving, concrete curb and gutter, necessary drainage facilities and necessary appurtenances in the general area bounded by S.T.H. 51 on the east, County Road E on the south, the west line of Sec. 27 on the west, and the Soo Line Railroad right of way on the north, as described in the Notice of Hearing at a cost presently estimated at $648,665.00, and substantially in accordance with the prelimi- nary report as to the feasibility thereof which is now on file in the office of the Clerk Administrator; and having considered the views of all interested persons and being fully advised in the premises, the Council does hereby determine and order that said improvement shall be constructed and financed, and special assessments shall be levied therefor, pursuant to said Chapter 429, and that the area proposed to be assessed therefor shall include the property as described in the Notice of Hearing. The City Public Works Director is directed to prepare and submit to the Council the final plans and specifications. . , I The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilman Hollenhorst, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: All; and the following voted against the same: None; whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 14 . . . .' STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk Administrator of the City of Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a meeting of the City Council of said City held on the date therein indi- cated with the original of said minutes on file in my office and that said extract is a full, true and correct transcript of said minutes, insofar as they relate to the proposed con- struction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-8l-3 under and pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, as amended. WITNESS MY HAND and the seal of said City this z...u day of December, 1981. ~{(;~ /~)f }fJ/~1 C~ty C er !l\l.n~strator '-- (SEAL)