Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.~~~ <br /> <br />Center Oaks Development <br />13736 NE Johnson St., Ham Lake, MN 55304 <br /> <br />fE~ :;;. 5 1991' <br /> <br />February 21, 1997 <br /> <br />City Council members and City Consultants <br />c/o Ms. Ry-Chel <br />City Clerk <br />1880 Main Street <br />Centerville, MN 55038 <br /> <br />HE: Hearinl! on proposed cbarl!es for utilitv benefit to Kenco\Center Oaks parcels <br /> <br />Dear Ms. Ry-Chel: <br /> <br />This letter serves to confirm our receipt of hearing notice and formal objection to any <br />charges for sanitary sewer service. Within the mailing, no data regarding water line <br />charges was included. As your consultants know, as shown on City comprehensive plans <br />and as builts, sanitary already exists to serve both parcels via a manhole in Center Street. <br />This access was created when the housing subdivision was built many years ago. <br /> <br />We will vigorously protest that no additional benefit is provided by the new sewer line <br />which previously did not exist. In addition, area charges are presumed to benefit a usable <br />land area. As your recent FEMA map update indicates, several portions of ours and other <br />parcels are within the 100 year t100d plain and portions are clearly going to be labeled <br />wetland. Therefore, no benefit can be derived from area unusable for development <br />purposes. This same logic ought to apply to the water area charges. The site must be <br />developable to at least minimum reasonable zoning criteria to be charged for a benefit. <br />Just as the Clearwater Meadows Outlot, and Sheehy sites are deleted from charges, so <br />must the Kenco "A & B" sites. <br /> <br />Weare suggesting that prior to any final proposed assessment, your consultant verify that <br />the proposed henefited lands are usable for upland development, then verify whether the <br />watershed will allow for water quality ponds within areas designated as wetlands or <br />t100dplain prior to determining the final usable or developable area. Once the usable land <br />is determined, then the project costs should be recalculated for each properties gain. Only <br />at that time can a true feasible development cost be defended. As an example, the Kenco <br />"B" parcel has a gross acreage of 1.7 Acres, but is probably only 50% buildable unless <br />wetland fiJl and off site water quality ponding is created. <br />