Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-11-28 CC Minutes - Approved CITY OF CENTERVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 28, 2012 6:30 p.m. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City of Centerville held their regularly scheduled meeting of November 28, 2012, at City Hall, 1880 Main Street. PRESENT: Mayor Tom Wilharber Council Member Ben Fehrenbacher Council Member Steve King Council Member D. Love Council Member Jeff Paar ABSENT: None STAFF: City Administrator Dallas Larson City Engineer Mark Statz Legal Counsel Kurt Glaser Public Works Director, Paul Palzer Greg Burmeister I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Wilharber called the meeting to order along with the public hearing for the 2013 Street Improvement Project, Item a at 6:30 p.m. II. PUBLIC HEARING(S) 1. 2013 Street Improvement Project a. 6:30 p.m. – Peterson Trail from Main Street to Fox Run, Fox Run from Peterson Trail Westerly to its Terminus in the Cul-de-sac, Hayfield Road from Peterson Trail to Mill Road and all of Houle Circle Engineer Statz stated that he desired to review a presentation with the public and then would address any questions that the public had. Engineer Statz stated that the City is allowed by MN State Statute, Chapter 429 to assess for such improvement projects and that this was the first required public hearing and that another public hearing would be held to discuss the individual property owner assessments. Engineer Statz stated that the improvements would include mill and overlay of the area(s) with drain tile, minor repairs made to curbing, storm sewer crossing(s), sanitary sewer issues, manhole rehabilitation and watermain/hydrant bolt replacement as deemed necessary. Engineer Statz stated that the City would be bonding for the project (approx. $497,000) along with specially assessing benefiting property owners 25% of the costs. Engineer Statz stated that he did not believe that the project should take more than three (3) weeks, weather dependent, and that at this evening’s meeting Council would be determining whether to go forward and prepare plans and specifications and receive bids for the project. Engineer Statz stated that the project could be stopped at any time to the point a contract has been City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 awarded for construction. Administrator Larson explained that residents would have a period to pay off special assessments without incurring interest, the assessments would be placed on their property for a period of 10 years and at an interest rate of 4% and that this is similar to the procedure that was executed for the 2009 street improvement project. Engineer Statz stated that a typical assessment would range from $2,000-$2,600 with an annual payment of $250-$300. Engineer Statz also reminded Council and residents that both of the proposed projects were a part of the 2009 Street Improvement Project but pulled due to costs and resident input. Council Member Fehrenbacher stated that if the mill and overlay project was completed, it would allow the aforementioned streets to be included in the thin mill & overlay maintenance program going forward and with those costs covered by City funding and as maintenance rather than special assessments. The hearing was then opened for public comment, the following persons expressed their views on the project. Mr. Cory Padrnos, 1874 Center Street, stated that he felt that Council was not being forthcoming with hidden costs such as hookup charges, cost of contractor charges to install services from the curbstop to the home, the assessed value of the project and that he has a well and desires to keep it and not connect to municipal water. Engineer Statz stated that he would address Mr. Padrnos questions when discussions took place for the Center Street, Ivy Court and Sumac Court portion of the project. Mr. Duane Chase, 1823 Hayfield Road, stated that the he has experienced standing water in front of his home throughout the year and anticipates that this project will alleviate this issue. Mr. Chase was unsure as to whether his home was connected to municipal water services. Engineer Statz stated that the contractors would evaluate storm sewer issues and determine whether additional drainage venues would be needed; however if existing storm sewers needed repair that would also be completed. Engineer Statz stated that the mill and overlay would re-crown the road which would assist in the drainage of water to the storm sewers. Engineer Statz stated that Mr. Chase was connected to municipal water. No one else was present who wished to speak with regard to the improvement. Motion was made by Council Member Fehrenbacher, seconded by Council Member Love to close the public hearing for the aforementioned roadways at 6:56 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. The Mayor opened the public hearing for the 2013 Street Improvement Project, Center Street, Sumac Court and Ivy Court at 7:15 p.m. Page 2 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 Engineer Statz stated that he desired to review a presentation with the public and then would address any questions that the public had. Engineer Statz stated that the City is allowed by MN State Statute, Chapter 429 to assess for such improvement projects and that this was the first required public hearing and that another public hearing would be held to discuss the individual property owner assessments. Engineer Statz reviewed the improvements to be made for Center Street, Ivy Court, and Sumac Court. Engineer Statz stated that the improvements would include total reconstruction of the roadway with new concrete curb and installation of municipal water services. Engineer Statz stated that all other improvements stated at the previous public hearing except for the roadway work would also apply to this project with the additions of required rain gardens, infiltration trenches, pond expansion, etc. required by Rice Creek Watershed District. Municipal watermain with services to the property line would be constructed with the improvement. Engineer Statz stated that the City would be bonding for the street project (approx. $911,000) along with specially assessing benefiting property owners approximately 20% of the costs. The City would pay for the municipal watermain and services to the curbstop (approx. $261,000) through the City’s Water Fund. Engineer Statz stated that Council may choose to include in the project a bid item to connect each home to the water service at the option of the home owner and could also include well abandonment. The City would finance this and in turn assess the property owners if they desired to be connected. However, if they did not desire to be connected then there would be future connection fees, permit fees, contractor fees and plumber fees at the time the owner connected. Engineer Statz discussed the pros and cons of having the municipal water installed at the same time as the reconstruction of the street: Pros – Entire project would be completed in one (1) season with the final lift being left until the remaining year, homeowners can finance the cost of the municipal water, connection and well separation/abandonment through the City and the City would likely receive more cost effective bidding if included in the bids. Cons – Additional engineering, legal and administrative fees, liability issues and degradation of the new roadway. Engineer Statz again stated that at this evening’s meeting Council would be determining whether to go forward and prepare plans and specifications and receive bids for the project. Engineer Statz stated that the project could be stopped at any time at this point up to the award of a contract for construction. Administrator Larson explained that residents would have a period to pay off special assessments without incurring interest, the assessments would be placed on their property for a period of 15 years and at an interest rate of 4% and that this is similar to the procedure that was executed for the 2009 street improvement project. Engineer Statz stated that a typical assessment would range from $3,500-$4,200 with an annual payment of $400-$500 for the street portion only. Discussion ensued regarding language within the current ordinance addresses connection to the municipal watermain if services are available and the deadline date of December 31, 2017. The City Council may consider extending the deadline to 2021 for this project similar to the 2009 Street Improvement Project property owners who received an extension of eight year from the completion date. Page 3 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 Engineer Statz addressed Mr. Padrnos’s questions from previous and stated that Council is contemplating not assessing for the installation of the watermain but rather recouping its costs through connection fees at such time as the property owner decided to connect to services, well failure or deadline date for connection. Engineer Statz stated that at the time of connection the property owner would pay a connection fee. Those fees are currently $6,350, lateral connection fee, trunk fee of $1,800, water meter fee of $400, permit and inspection fees of $400. The costs for constructing the service line to the home is estimated at approximately $2,500 for service being bored into the home and connection to inside piping. The total for construction of the service and the related fees is estimated at approximately $11,450. Engineer Statz stated that these fees are current fees and that the City Council could increase them in the future through the Fee Schedule. Mayor Wilharber questioned whether the fees included abandoning the homeowner’s existing well. Both Attorney Glaser and Public Works Director Palzer stated that the City does not require the abandoning of wells but the but that is regulated by Minnesota Department of Health. Director Palzer stated that the City requires that the city water serve all of the domestic water use of the home and that wells serve outside faucets and irrigations only. Separation of well water from municipal water services is critical due to potential for contamination. Engineer Statz stated that if Council chooses to allow other resident’s that have previously had municipal water installed on their street(s) but have not yet connected, an opportunity to connect with this project, the estimated cost for connection would be approximately $16,100. At that point the hearing was opened to public comment, the following persons expressed their views on the project: Mr. Luke Kowarsch, 6933 Sumac Court, stated that the State of Minnesota regulates abandoning private wells and that residents can not connect their well to piping installed in their homes for the delivery of municipal water services. Mr. Kowarsch felt that Council was holding residents hostage with the large amount of special assessments that would be placed on their property and this would not allow for their property being saleable. Mr. James Mickle, 1882 Center Street, questioned whether the City completed soil borings, whether the street needed such extensive repair, why the higher level of improvements for Center Street versus the other streets (Fox, Run, Houle Circle, etc.) and that more damage would be sustained by the subgrade of the existing roadway if municipal water was installed. Ms. LeAnne Lingren, 1859 Center Street, questioned who would be responsible for the payment of special assessments if she determined to sell her home at this point. Mr. Kurt Frison, 6913 Sumac Court, questioned the location of extending the existing storm water hold pond due to the locations of the trail and roadway that abut it, the Page 4 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 location of a rain garden in the front of his property due to the necessity of his vehicle gaining access to the rear of his property, the close proximity of the existing catchbasin to the proposed rain garden, the ramifications of being forced into connecting to municipal water services and the forced sale of his property due to excessive special assessments. Mr. Cory Padrnos, 1874 Center Street, stated that at the open house it was stated that rain gardens would not be needed for this project and now Council is stating that they are required, questioned how the interest is derived either simple or compounded, how Council can justify the project when the economy is currently declining, that the City must show a benefit to the property owners to specially assess them and without the watermain there is no benefit, his home value has declined approximately $40,000 comparative to the proposed special assessments of $11,450 and that he felt that the street was in need of repair however, watermain was not. Mr. Tim Peloquin, 1849 Center Street, questioned the City’s purchase of surplus property from Anoka County along Peltier Lake. Ms. CherylAnn Steele, 6926 Sumac Court, stated that the existing catchbasin in their front yard would be too close to a rain garden, it would deter access to the rear of their property, that each letter that the City forwards to residents regarding this project there are contradictions and proposed estimates have been inaccurate, connection fees are not assessments, the City is making a profit off of those fees and that is illegal, concurred that the street does need re-construction, does not want water services and they will fight the assessments if forced to. Mr. Joe Steele, 6926 Sumac Court, stated that approximately one year ago he was told he could not receive overweight permits for the reconstruction of his driveway while at the same time was told that the road project and watermain project would not be taking place or he would not have completed the driveway. Mr. Steele felt that the roadway’s present condition and curbing was due to the City’s lack of maintenance, that the City should incur costs associated with the installation of the watermain and not force resident to connect. Mr. Steele questioned the necessity of a full curb reconstruction. Engineer Statz addressed all questions and comments as follows: The Department of Health regulates that abandonment of wells; however, the City does require that the well water is separated from the municipal water services. Administrator Larson stated that the individual property owners should check with the State of Minnesota to ascertain the correct regulations regarding wells. Engineer Statz stated that Center Street has experienced excessive heaving due to the high water and clay content in the soils and a standard overlay would not repair this type of problem. Engineer Statz and Attorney Glaser stated that a homeowner would need to discuss property sale issues with a realtor. Engineer Statz stated that pond expansion would take place along the newly constructed trail and realignment would be needed, that the placement of raingardens should be at an upstream point and are required by RCWD, the City is cognizant of rear property access and will accommodate such. The City maintains the raingardens to a certain extent, however, it is the property owner’s responsibility to maintain them similar to the bottom Page 5 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 portion of your driveway, boulevards and sidewalks. Engineer Statz apologized for misunderstanding regarding the required raingardens and their installation. Engineer Statz stated that it is customary for a City to obtain appraisals of a limited amount of homes that would be affected by a project and that would be taking place in the instance. Engineer Statz also stated that a decision at this time by the Council would order plans and specifications which will allow the receiving bids. At that point, the Council would determine whether the project is economically feasible versus the benefit to property owners, and noted that an assessment hearing would be held at a later date. Engineer Statz stated that the 2009 Improvement Project went out for bids on two separate occasions prior to Council committing to the project. Council Member Fehrenbacher stated that the City’s purchased of the surplus County property following Staff research regarding whether the lot was buildable with variances, that the property was undervalued by the County and that a $200,000 to $300,000 home would provide the City with more tax revenue than a $30,000 structure. Engineer Statz stated that during construction the contract would ensure that driveways were restored to their present condition within the road right-of-way. Engineer Statz also stated that most cities assess for similar projects; however, each municipality differs on the percentage paid by the benefiting property owners and that the City of Centerville’s fees for connection, trunk, meter, and permits were well within acceptable perameters and that the city is not making a profit. Public Works Director Palzer stated that previously the roadway has heaved approximately 8” in certain areas and some drainage problems in the area have been addressed in previous years with significant improvement. Director Palzer also reminded residents that if a total reconstruction of Center Street was completed the roadway would receive regular maintenance and crack sealing along with mill and overlay approximately every 15 years with those costs being paid for through the City’s Street Maintenance Fund. Engineer Statz stated that the Feasibility report could be reviewed on line. No one else was present who wished to speak with regard to the improvement. Motion was made by Council Member Fehrenbacher, seconded by Council Member Paar to close the public hearing for the aforementioned roadways at 8:56 p.m. and returned to the regular agenda items. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. 2. Municipal Services Rendered ~ Nuisance Abatement (Tabled from Previous Meeting) ~ Discussed later in the meeting. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Wilharber noted that an updated Joint Powers Agreement Between Anoka County & The Municipalities, Townships & School Districts had been provided and should be Page 6 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 replaced with the version contained in Council’s packets for this evening. Mayor Wilharber also noted that Mr. Cory Padrnos, 1874 Center Street, request for additional information – 2013 Street Improvement Project email dated November 28, 2012 be contained in the packet as presented. Mayor Wilharber added Centerville Claims (Check #27633-27648) with Voided Check #27604 and Centennial Police Department Claims through November 21, 2012 (Check #9204-9224) be added to the Consent Agenda. Mayor Wilharber added the addition of Centerville Road Re-Construction under New Business. Motion was made by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Paar to approve the Set Agenda as presented. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.November 14, 2012 City Council Meeting Minutes Administrator Larson requested that Public Works Director Palzer be added to the minutes as a Staff individual being present. Motion was made by Council Member Love, seconded by Council Member Fehrenbacher to approve the November 14, 2012 City Council Meeting Minutes with the aforementioned correction. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. V. CONSENT AGENDA 1. City of Centerville November 15, 2012 through November 28, 2012 Claims (Check #27615-27632) & (Check #26733-27648) w/Voided Check #27604 2. Centennial Fire District Claims through November 19, 2012 (Check #5586-5595) 3. Centennial Police Department Claims through November 21, 2012 (9404-9224) 4.Successful Performance Evaluation – Mr. Tedd Peterson, Public Works Maintenance Technician Motion was made by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Fehrenbacher to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. VI. AWARDS/PRESENTATIONS/APPEARANCES 1. Centennial Lakes Police Department – Quarterly Report (Sgt. Pat Aldrich) Sergeant Aldrich was unable to attend due to a prior commitment. VII. OLD BUSINESS Page 7 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 1. None VIII. NEW BUSINESS 1. Res. #12-027 – Adopting Special Assessment for Nuisance Abatement Attorney Glaser stated that he had spoke with the Baron’s attorney at 5:30 p.m. and was re-assured that they would be in attendance this evening; however, they are not present. Mayor Wilharber opened the Municipal Services Rendered ~ Nuisance Abatement Hearing at 9:25 p.m. Attorney Glaser stated that pursuant to the signed Consent Decree the City initiated cleanup of the subject property (7121 Centerville Road) and language contained in that same Decree included the permission to abate the nuisance and specially assess the property for all legal, labor and third party fees incurred by the City. Attorney Glaser stated that the City’s incurred costs are $16,514.54, the City tabled this item from their November 14, 2012 meeting at the request of the property owners and the City complied; however, the deadline date for County certification is pending (November 30, 2012) and action can no longer be delayed. Consensus of the Council was that every attempt has been made to work with the property owners regarding this issue from the time that the first complaints were received to this pending action, that the City has granted the property owner’s requests for additional time to complete work, hearings, meeting, etc. and that the process has taken over a year. Motion was made by Council Member Fehrenbacher, seconded by Council Member Love to close the public hearing for Municipal Services Rendered ~ Nuisance Abatement. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued regarding the length of the assessment. Attorney Glaser stated that he had contact the Baron’s attorney for discussion on this matter, however, he had not received a return telephone call. Motion was made by Council Member Fehrenbacher, seconded by Council Member King to approve Res. #12-027 with the length of the assessment being payable over a five (5) year term at 4.5% interest. Council Members Paar and Love opposed. Motion carried. 2.Res. #12-028 – Ordering 2013 Street Improvement Project Mayor Wilharber read the proposed resolution ordering plans and specifications for the 2013 Street Improvement Project. Page 8 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 Engineer Statz stated that even if Council approves the resolution, the City is not required to proceed until awarding a contract for construction. Lengthy discussion was had regarding the content of the plans and specifications, whether water should be included in them, the previous removal of the reconstruction of Center Street, Ivy Court and Sumac Court from the 2009 Street Improvement Project per resident request, a deadline date for connection, Council’s desire to accept resident input but also provide long-term consideration for the City and residents as a whole. Consensus of the Council was to order the 2013 Street Improvement Project with the understanding that throughout the process prior to the Assessment Hearing Council could modify any scope of the project if they desired. Council Member Paar questioned Engineer Statz as to the feeling of whether bids are being received well within the parameters of the feasibility study estimates. Engineer Statz stated that bids that he has been receiving are very similar to the estimates with a fair amount of work being available for contractors. Motion was made by Council Member Paar, seconded by Council Member Fehrenbacher to adopt Res. #12-028 Ordering the 2013 Street Improvement Project as presented. Council Member Paar again stated that the Council is not making the final decision on the project at this time and that changes in the project could occur subsequent to receiving bids similar to the 2009 Street Improvement Project where the scope of the project was modified and bid in two separate intervals. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Consensus of the Council was to direct staff to bring back for the next meeting, a draft ordinance amending City Code, Chapter 51.08, (D) which would modify the existing language to include “except where water is made available by the City after January 1, 2013 being required to connect no later than December 31, 2021.” 3. Ticket Education Program a. Agreement Attorney Glaser stated that the test period of six (6) months has lapsed for the program, gave a brief overview of the on-line educational program offered in addition to all other legal recourses available for similar violations, reviewed statistics obtained from users, reported that the City of Circle Pines had approved the program for a three (3) year period as similar to tonight’s agreement before Council and that the City of Lexington would be considering it shortly. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the program, revenue generation to the City’s General Fund, the Centennial Police Department funding through the City’s General Page 9 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 Fund, options for ending the program, Kurt’s part in the program’s inception, public education, and convenience for offender resolution and concerns for State repercussions due to their lost revenue. Several members of the audience made unfavorable comments regarding the Centennial Lakes Police Department and their handling of ticketing issues stating that they perceive the Department as targeting residents. Council Member Fehrenbacher stated that these concerns would be better addressed at a Police Governing Board meeting. Motion was made by Council Member Fehrenbacher, seconded by Council Member Paar to approve the Ticket Education Program Agreement as presented. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. b. Program Policies & User Agreement Motion was made by Council Member Fehrenbacher, seconded by Council Member Love to approve the Program Policies & User Agreement as presented. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Joint Powers Agreement Between Anoka County & The Municipalities, Townships & School Districts in Anoka County to Allocate Costs for Election Expenses Administrator Larson stated that the maintenance costs for the equipment, excluding catastrophic occurrences, is covered in the agreement with the City’s financial responsibility being approximately $8,560 over a ten year period. The County is requesting that the City approve the agreement allowing additional non-substantive changes throughout the County, School Districts, Township and Municipalities’ adoptions. Motion was made by Council Member Love, seconded by Council Member Paar to adopt the presented Joint Powers Agreement Between Anoka County & The Municipalities, Townships & School Districts in Anoka County to Allocate Costs for Election Expense as presented allowing non-substantive changes throughout the numerous entities process of approval. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. 5. Anoka County Highway Department Reconstruction of CSAH21/Centerville Road Mayor Wilharber stated that Engineer Statz, Administrator Larson and himself attended a meeting with the Anoka County Highway Department regarding their plans for reconstructing that portion of Centerville from CSAH14/Main Street to Birch Street. Mayor Wilharber stated that the County has made significant modifications to their proposed project since the last meeting. Engineer Statz stated that their existing plans are more scaled back than previously presented with turn lanes being eliminated, instead of total reconstruction it would be mill and overlay, the County’s reluctance to provide any Page 10 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 road work if the downtown redevelopment went through in the next several years in that area, determination of urban (Heritage to Meadow Lane) section that would include curb and gutter versus rural (Meadow Lane to Birch Street) section and the County’s willingness to look at Centerville’s options for trails, storm sewer issues, etc. if the City proposes them and pays for them. Administrator Larson stated that Engineer Statz could be engaged to oversee the project on the City’s behalf and provide suggestions for options that the City may desire to be included in the project. Engineer Statz felt that he could provide Council desired services in an amount not to exceed $1,000. Consensus of the Council was that the County is requesting that anything other than a standard mill and overlay would be at the City’s expense, that the County should attend one of Centerville’s meeting prior to their Open House scheduled for January 29, 2013 to discuss potential items of inclusion in the project desired by the City, the need for City approval of a Joint Powers Agreement prior to the project commencement and costs associated with the City’s desired amenities. Motion was made by Council Member Love, and seconded by Council Member Fehrenbacher to authorize Engineer Statz, Stantec, to review the County’s plans regarding the proposed mill and overlay project for CSAH21/Centerville Road and provide input on behalf of the City at a cost not to exceed $1,000. All in favor. Motion passed unanimously. IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES 1. None. X. CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION 1. Litigation Issue – Request by City Attorney Not Needed. XI. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Municipal Services Rendered ~ Nuisance Abatement (Tabled from Previous Meeting) Previously held earlier in the meeting. XII. NEW BUSINESS 1. Res. #12-0XX – Adopting Special Assessment for Nuisance Abatement Previously acted upon earlier in the meeting. Page 11 of 12 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 X. ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Council Member Paar, and seconded by Council Member King to adjourn the regularly schedule meeting of November 28, 2012 at 10:12 p.m. All in favor. Motion passed unanimously. Transcribed by City Staff member: Teresa Bender, City Clerk Page 12 of 12