5.7A. SR 11-12-2002Howard R, Green Oompany
Item 5.7.A.
October 23, 2002
File: 818860J-0030
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: BOSTON STREET/CONCORD STREET FEASIBILITY STUDY
Dear Council Members:
As directed by the City Council, we have held an informational meeting with residents of Boston Street
and Concord Street on Wednesday, October 16, 2002. This informational meeting was to gage the
interest from the property owners to proceeding with a feasibility study to analyze the installation of
City sanitary sewer, watermain, and permanent urban streets on both Concord Street and Boston
Street. This informational meeting was held in response to a petition, a copy of which is attached,
which was received from Boston Street residents requesting such a feasibility study.
Attached are the minutes and sign-up sheet from the informational meeting and an exhibit showing
the interest expressed by the various homeowners. Those residents of Boston Street expressed
interest in a feasibility study very similar to that expressed in the petition that was submitted earlier
this year. Of those residents living on Concord Street and Mississippi Road, seven indicated that they
were interested in proceeding to a feasibility study to analyze the cost of installing City sewer, water,
and permanent streets. Four indicated they were not interested.
Based on the responses received at the informational meeting, we have prepared the attached draft
resolution ordering the feasibility study. If the City Council would like to proceed to a feasibility study
for both Concord Street and Boston Street, a four-fifths vote of the City Council will be required, since
this larger scale project cannot be considered a petition improvement.
If you have any questions regarding this issue, please call.
Sincerely,
Howard R. Green Company
TJM:sgw
Enclosure
Ltr-102302-Council
1326 Energy Park Drive · St. Paul, MN 55108 · 651/644-4389 fax 651/644-9446 toll free 888/368-4389
PETITION, WAIVER AND AGREEMENT FOR INSTALLATION
OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND
ASSESSMENT OF THE COSTS THEREFOR
TO' City Council of the City of Elk River
We the undersigned owner(s) of not less than 35 percent of the real property legally
described
on exhibit A attached hereto; or
as follows:
petition the City of Elk River as follows:
To design and install on the Property the public improvements
(Improvements) indicated below:
Streets, as required by city, including grading, graveling and
stabilizing, constructing and sodding ofberms, swales and
boulevards, permanent street surfacing with bituminous material,
installing concrete curbs, gutters and driveway approaches, and
installing street lights and street signs as required by Elk River
Municipal Utilities and the City Street Department (Street
Improvements);
Sidewalks and trails, as required by the City (Sidewalk
Improvements);
Storm sewers, as required by the City, including all necessary catch
basins, ditches, inlets, retention areas and other appurtenances
(Storm Sewer Improvements);
Trunk water main and sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the
City to provide water and sanitary sewer service to the Property
(Trunk Improvements);
Sanitary sewer laterals or extensions, as required by the City,
including ali necessary building services and other appurtenances
(Sanitary Sewer Improvements);
Watermain laterals or extensions, as required by the City, including
all necessary building services, hydrants, valves and other
appurtenances (Watermain Improvements);
To assess the Property for the cost of installing the Improvements, including
the Property's proportionate share of the cost of installing Trunk
Improvements, if any, in an amount not to exceed:
This amount represents the current estimated cost of the Improvements.
The amount to be assessed may be increased only if:
(a)
A larger assessment amount is agreed to in a developer's agreement
for the Property; or
(b)
Additional Improvements are installed or the costs of installing the
indicated Improvements increases as a result of requests made by
the Owner(s); or
(c)
The Owner(s) provide written approval of a larger amount to be
assessed.
To apportion the assessments for the Improvements to the buildable lots of
record within the Property as the city shall determine.
To levy the assessments for the Improvements such that the assessments
shall be paid over such period of time and at such rate of interest as the City
shall determine.
Owner(s) represent and warrant that they are the sole fee owner(s) of the Property.
Owner(s) agree, in consideration of the City designing and installing the
Improvements:
That the City will not install the Improvements unless the Owner(s) agree to
pay and/or be assessed for the City's costs of installing the Improvements.
To provide the City with a proposed plan for development of the Property
from which the city can design the Improvements.
2
To grant to the City, prior to the City ordering installation of the
Improvements to proceed, such easements or other interests in the Property
as the City shall determine necessary for the purpose of installing the
Improvements, and such additional easements or property interests as the
City shall determine necessary to extend City water and sanitary sewer
service and other Improvements to adjacent and surrounding properties.
To pay the amounts assessed to the Property for the Improvements as
provided in this Petition and Agreement.
To provide the City with cash, a letter of credit, or some other security
acceptable to the City, in its sole discretion, to protect the City in the event
that development of the Property does not proceed. The amount of the
security to be submitted with this petition shall be:
$ , which is the City's estimated cost of a feasibility study for
the Improvements.
Additional security shall be provided prior to the preparation of plans and
specifications for the Improvements, in an amount equal to the City's
estimated costs for preparing the plans and specifications.
Additional security in the amount of the estimated cost of installing the
Improvements shall be provided before the City will order the
Improvements installed.
The security shall be forfeited, in an amount equal to the City's actual costs
for the feasibility study and/or the plans and specifications, or for the
construction of Improvements, in the event that a developer's agreement is
not executed.
Owner(s) specifically waive any objection to the City's design and installation of
the Improvements, including any objection to the final design of the Improvements, any
objection to the final location of the Improvements, any objection to the procedure
pursuant to which the City orders the Improvements installed, and any objection to the
City's failure to strictly follow the notice and other requirements of Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 429 with respect to ordering the Improvements installed.
Owner(s) expressly waive objection to any irregularity with regard to the
assessment of the Property for the Improvements, expressly waive any claim that the
3
amount assessed is excessive, expressly waive all rights of appeal, including any rights
under Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes, from the assessment by the City for the costs of
installing the Improvements, and expressly agree:
1. to pay when due all assessments levied for the Improvements;
2. that the Improvements will increase the fair market value of the Property by
an amount equal to or in excess of the amount to be assessed hereunder;
3. that such increase in fair market value is a special benefit to the Property;
4. that the amount to be assessed hereunder is reasonable, fair and equitable;
and
5. that there are no other properties which should be assessed for the
Improvements.
Owner(s) understand and agree that the City may, in its sole discretion and for any
reason:
1.
2.
Decline to accept this Petition for installation of Improvements;
Decline to order plans and specifications or proceed with all or a portion of
the Improvements, following completion of a feasibility study; or
Decline to proceed with all or any portion of the Improvements following
the preparation of plans and specifications.
This Petition, Waiver and Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each
of which shall be deemed the original.
Dated this .5-- day of
200~
OWNER(S) (signature required)
Date
2.
Property
Signature of Owner Print Owner Name Description
10.
11.
12.
Date received by City:
By:
Its:
T
CITY
ORONO ~
CEMETERY)
HALL
NO
1
5
< 1
5
300
DESIGNED BY: KI DRAWN BY: LLARSON
APPROVED BY:APPROVED_BY JOB NUMBER 818860J
CAD DATE: Auqust 6, 2002
CAD FILE: O:'",.CAOX,,818860J~818860EX.dwq
1326 ENERGY PARK DRIVE
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 5510~
(651) 644-4389
Howard R Green Compar~
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
CONCORD STREET/1
BOSTON STREET
Informational Meeting Minutes
Boston Street & Concord Street
October 22, 2002 - 6:00 P.M.
Kristie Thompson from Howard R. Green welcomed those present to the neighborhood meeting
regarding the proposed reconstruction and addition of utilities for Boston Street and Concord
Street from Mississippi Road to Orono Road. (See sign in sheet for those in attendance.)
Kristie explained that the purpose of the informational meeting was to gauge neighborhood
interest in completing a feasibility study that would determine how the streets would be
reconstructed and utilities extended. The feasibility study would also allow the City to determine
costs associated with the improvements and how they would be assessed to property owners. It
was explained that the majority of residents along Boston Street had signed a petition in favor of
the feasibility study and that Council had directed staff to determine interest from residents along
Concord Street since that was the last remaining street in the area that was not served with public
utilities. It was explained that expressing interest in a feasibility study was not an automatic vote
for the improvements but that the issue would be revisited once the study was complete.
At this point, Kristie reviewed a general concept for how utilities would be extended and what the
typical road section would consist of.
A resident stated concern with transitioning to their driveway if barrier curb and gutter was
added, which may require lowering the street grade. Kristie explained that the issue would be
addressed if the project proceeded to design. The road would most likely require lowering so that
yards drained to the street and proposed storm sewer. It was explained that if the project moves
forward the issue would be looked at and a profile that resulted in the least impacts to driveway
grades would be created.
At this point several residents voiced their concern with installation of barrier curb and gutter.
Residents wondered if removing the curb and gutter from the project would result in a lower
assessment. It was stated that removing the curb and gutter would lower the construction amount
but it would not be substantial compared to the overall cost. Residents still expressed interest in
this option and Kristie asked those interested to note their opinion on the sign-in sheet.
Concern was expressed by residents that concrete sidewalk would be installed. The residents
were not in favor of including the sidewalk in the project. It was explained that at this time no
sidewalk construction was proposed.
A question was asked if the utilities could be extended within the boulevard area to avoid the cost
of reconstructing the roadway. It was noted that the overall disruption would be relatively the
same. Additional restoration of front yards would be necessary and the road would need to be
removed where services were extended to residents across the street from the utilities. It was
noted that the overall cost in trying to save sections of roadway would end up approximately the
same as if the entire roadway were removed.
A resident expressed concern that private utilities would be in the way of the improvements.
Kristie noted that the private utilities were installed within the City's right-of-way and would be
required to move at their own cost ifa conflict were to arise with the City's improvements.
It was stated that at this point the City was looking at assessing residents for the improvements on
a per unit basis. The question was asked if a resident already had public sewer and water because
their property was also adjacent to Orono Road if they would be assessed for the installation of
utilities. Kristie stated that if the project progressed to the feasibility study, the City would look
at assessing all residents for the street improvements and possibly assessing only those currently
without utilities for the extension of the sanitary sewer and watermain. It was also stated that
there would be additional costs associated with the project. These included a sewer and water
hook-up fee, the cost of running services from the road right-of-way to the home, abandoning the
septic system and well, and a monthly charge for usage. Kristie noted that if the project were
completed, residents would have two years from the time the utilities were available to hook-up
or the City would automatically charge the property owner the hook-up fees and start charging a
monthly user fee.
Residents along Mississippi Road asked if it would be possible to extend utilities to serve their
property in conjunction with the project. Kristie noted that this could be included in the
feasibility study if enough interest was expressed.
Kristie asked for a consensus of those present regarding their interest in this project. Those
present indicated their general acceptance of proceeding to the feasibility stage of the project.
They were asked to indicate their interest on the sign-in sheet. A map noting the responses is
attached.
Kristie stated this information would be provided to the City Council at an upcoming meeting. If
it was determined by Council that a feasibility study would be undertaken, notice would be
provided to the residents.
The Kristie thanked those present for taking the time to discuss this project with staff.
The meeting was adjourned.
~~Howard R, Green Company
City
Informational Meeting
PROffECT NAME:
OWNER:
DATE OF MEETING:
Boston Street / Concord Street, Street and Utility Tmprovements
City of Elk River
6:00 p.m., Wednesday October 16th, 2002
Name (Print)Mailing Address/Zip Phone No.
, -~uck ~vil qql
......
(~,'~, ~,_fu~ ,~, ~~ ~-.
O:~PROJ\818860j\0030\signin.doc
f,,/eo 5e
RESOLUTION 02-
A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY OF ELK RIVER
A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY OF ELK RIVER
ORDERING A PRELIMINARYFEASlBILITY REPORT IN THE MATTER OF THE
BOSTON STREET AND CONCORD STREET IMPROVEMENT OF 2002
WHEREAS
the City has determined that it should consider improving certain property
by extending City sanitary sewer and water along with permanent urban
streets on Boston Street and Concord Street between Mississippi Road
and Orono Parkway; and
WHEREAS
Council must first secure a preliminary feasibility study in order to
consider making the improvement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Elk River,
Minnesota:
This matter shall be referred to Howard R. Green company, who is requested to
provide tot the City Council a report advising, in a preliminary way, whether the
proposed improvement is feasible and whether the improvement should thus be
made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement and the estimated
cost of the improvement as recommended.
Passed and adopted this 12th day of November 2002.
ATTEST:
Stephanie A. Klinzing, Mayor
Sandra A. Peine, City Clerk
Res-102302-818860J[1]
City
River
\
\
CONCORD STREET/BOSTON STREEt,
\
\
PROJECT AREA
CONCORD STREET
4-NO
7-YES
~'-6
BOSTON STREET
1 -NO
5-YES
~'-2
INDICATED THEY WOULD LIKE A RURAL
SECTION ROAD
· . NOT IN Al-rENDANCE AT INFORMATIONAL
MEETING, CALLED IN THEIR VOTE
0
DESIGNED By:GWR DRAWN BY: TAE
APPROVED By:TJM JO~ NUMBER 250105
CAD DATE: October 10 2002 12:02:00 p.m,
CAB FIIF: 250105M~250105 EXHIBIT 2.0WG (TELGAAR)
JOHN AND KATHLEEN
75-476-0280
.,YES
TINA M. ROACH
·eNO
GERALD SONTERRE
75-476-0150
YES
DENNIS AND
COLLEEN ETHEN
75-476-0160
.,YES
JAN AND
SYNTHIA OLSON
75-478-0160
JOHN AND
MARGARET LONGIE
75-478-0170
NElL SMITH AND
M.
75-476-0260
.,YES
JAMES AND
ELA!NE PEPtN
75-476-0250
eYES
RL L. AND
)ENNIS AND
MARY GUNDERSOt
75-476-0240
*YES
ROBERT AND
ELAINE STUEFFEN
75-468-0235
eYES
JEFI~ERY DAUGHERTY
75-1476-O2.30
F.F.=99.O9'
~ POWELL INVESTMENTS
\ 75-468-0240
KEVIN J. AND /
CINDY NOVOTNY / '
75-476-0130 / PETER A. JAND -_
/
751~476-i120 ;ARY A. STATEMA
75-476-0110
:OBERT ALD
OANN LA
5-468-(
MICHAELI AND
DONNA L;. GILLES
75-468-'0140
YES I
~OBERT AND
IOANN LARS£
75-468-015(
YES
BOSTON eT
GINA M.
GINA M.
DEMARRE
75-468
-0215
MISTY DAHLVANG
75-468-0110
/
DEqNIS AND
LUqlLLE LLOYD
75-468-0205
3225
JOSEPH AND TWlLAM
O'KEEFE
75-476-0210
NO
IRVIN AND CONNIE-LE
\\ MOLDENHAURER
7.~ 60
DANIEL A. AND
JILL M. KOLLES
75-4-76-0220
NO
/
/
/
/
/
/
I
/
Howard R. Green CompanY ll~""
NO.