Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-04-1975 Council Minutes Special Meeting I � ' ' CITY OF ORONO � � Special Meeting of the Orono Council, 6 : 00 P.M. September 4, 1975 f The Orono Council met on the above date � pursuant to the announcement given at the Public Hearing on September 2, 1975, and pursuant � to notice given to the newspaper to consider the • matter of 73-1 Sewer Assessments and to review all oral and written comments submitted by � citizens. The following members were present: Mayor Searles, Councilmembers Butler and � Massengale. Also present: Engineer Long, Attorney Malkerson, City Administrator Benson, � and Building & Zoning Administrator Muhich. Absent: Councilmeribers Paurus and Welsh. t � Administrator Benson announced at this time, that this was not a public hearing but a special Council + meeting to review and answer specific written and oral comments as of record at the time of the � meeting and that the official newspapers were notified of this meeting. • While there were numerous comments, they did � fall in categories that could, in many cases, � be answered in groups. All matters of restoration for the project were referred to the City Engineer ► for action or explanation to the one who commented concerning same. The following submitted complaints � regarding restoration: Gary Krimmel, 960 Partenwood; Thomas Smith, 1205 Tonkawa; James Glynn, 880 1 Windjammer; James Kinney, 996 North Arm Drive; Herman Laue, 595 Park Lane; Charles Wilde, � 692 Tonkawa Road, Gerald Parten, 985 Tonkawa; � Robert Keiffer, 669 Minnetonka Highlands; and Jay Becker, 3145 North Shore Drive. � The problem of deferrment of assessments for � senior citizens was posed by Robert Larson, 724 Tonkawa; Joan Anthony, 3115 North Shore Drive; r and Richard Moen, 2480 Watertown Road. There ' followed a general discussion concerning that possibility. Because of need for further study i on this subject, it was referred to the meeting of September 8, 1975 for further discussion. � Some items as to cost were discussed and answered � at the hearing of September 2 , 1975, complaints were received regarding this from Ron Willow, � 774 Tonkawa; Thomas Smith, 1205 Tonkawa; Jerry • Scidmore, 125 Hackberry Hill; James Kinney, 996 North Arm Drive; Richard Nelson, Route 1, � Long Lake; and Marge Gasch, 1030 Tonkawa. � � � � � �PECIAL MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 4 , 1975 Page 2 � i Some questions regarding equitableness of 60/40 assessment spread were brought up: George Johnson, � Partenwood Road; Robert Larson, 724 Tonkawa; Ken Weestrand, 885 Tonkawa; Margaret Christensen, 51 � Hackberry Hill; James 6�arner, 80 Hackberry HIll. There followed a lenghty discussion by the citizens � and Council. Some citizens were for it, some . for an all unit charge, some for an all front footage or area charge. This problem was moved � to the September 8, 1975 meeting for further discussion. i The question of water being placed at the same � time as sewer. While the area was not outlined, it was inferred that the Hackberry Hill area was � the area. Councilmembers brought out that a � thorough study had been made on this before reaching the decision that water was not � feasible. Factors in reaching this decision was that the cost was above replacing individual on-site � water systems and the usage would hydraulically overburden the Long Lake sewer system coupled with � resultant low water pressure. To counteract this problem, a new well and tower would be necessary near � the Orono High School. It was also felt that municipal ` water was not the health hazard necessity that public sewer is. �• An individual review was made of the Russell Lund RUSSELL LUND assessment on 905 Tonkawa Road. The property 905 Tonkawa Road consists of three lots in Vasa Park, assessed � for three units and frontage on the roll. Engineer Long explained sewer was brought to the north and � south lot lines but the center lot would have to r be serviced when used and recommended that that area be assessed a unit charge. � Butler moved, Massengale seconded, that since the � center lot did not have service and there was some question of the placement of the house which might � encroach partly on this lot, the lot should be fully assessed. Motion, Ayes (3) - Ielays (0) . r � The problem of Phillip Dykstra, 3080 North Shore PHILLIP DYKSTRA Drive, was reviewed. Engineer Long explained that 3080 North Shore Dr. ! since the lot had adequate frontage and size for two lots, it was assessed for two lots, including � frontage. P�Iassengale felt this type of assessment could force development. Engineer Long said there � were about ten parcels similarily assessed. Members • asked if the unit could be deferred with a resultant $37, 777 drop in the assessment. It was felt that � while there was some overage to cover contingencies, � the subject should have further study and deferred the matter to the September 8, 1975 meeting for further discussion. Letters on the same type of � assessment were received from James Spilde, 640 Tonkawa Road; Paul Ellingson, North Shore Drive; � Ken Weestrand, 885 Tonkawa Road; Howard Meagher, i 3980 Dahl Road; Robert Parten, Tonkawa Road. � • � 3PECIAL MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 4, 1975 Page 3 . Harry Coult, among the audience had questions about HARRY COULT cost of laying sewer. It was explained that just JAMES KINNEY � laying the pipe is not the only cost. There are engineering cost and administrative costs a�.c�ecl. � At this time, the discussion turned to a letter • from James Kinney, 996 North Arm Drive, who questioned why they should pay for lift stations + on adjacent low lots where theirs was a high lot. Massengale stated you cannot draw an assessment � to such a fine line that the cost of sewering each lot or certain areas could be individually computed. � Economies of sca_le were effected by having one large project. �7e can't logically spell out figures ` for each area and say that was the actual cost • of sewering that area.and to do so would result in more assessments for everyone. � James Wa.rner, 80 Hackberry Hill, felt that fair- JAMES WARNER � minded people should not object to the placing of 80 Hackberry Hill 40% instead of 6% on the general levy. Butler ! countered by saying the policy in the past had been the same as now, and that since about 80-90% � of the sewer area was already sewered under past � policy it would almost be double taxation to ask the people sewered under that policy when they � paid 100% of the cost to help pay for this project. � There were a number of letters questioning the DAVID RIDLER � footage assessed to their properties. Council- 960 Tonkawa members and Engineer Long studied the problem of David Ridler, 960 Tonkawa. All agreed that 150' � would be a more equitable frontage assessment . than the 200 ' , using past policy as a guideline. . Next, the petition of Kenneth Vogel, 875 Wind- KErdPJETH VOGEL jammer Lane, to reduce his assessable footage was 875 Windjammer Lane + studied. The Engineer stated he arrived at the footage on this corner lot by taking 500 of the A total footage on the two street sides. Since the policy has been to assess the short side on � these lots, the Engineer felt the assessable • footage should be reduced from 210 ' to 160 ' . � Councilmembers felt the assessable footage of DOUGLAS KELM Douglas Kelm, 4070 Dahl Road, was equitable 4070 Dahl Road � since the policy of using average dimensions on irregular shaped lots was followed. • Richard Hollander, 680 North Arm Drive, sent a RICHARD HOLLANDER � letter stating he felt since he only had 0.63 680 North Arm Drive � of the one acre requirement of the zone he was in, he should only be assessed 630 of the unit � requirement. Again, the policy has been to � assess every resident a unit regardless of lot size as long as the lot is buildable or can be joined with an adjacent lot to create a bu�ldable � lot. � i � � � SPECIA.L MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 4, 1975 Page 4 ,� Two property owners, Richard Wagman and Ivan RICHARD WAGMAN Gonsolus, Daniel 's Long Lake Heights, who owned IVAN GONSOLUS � two lots of record next to their homestead felt . the assessments, or at least the unit assessment on these properties , should be dropped until � built on. Again, the policy stating all lots of record meeting the zoning code would have to be S fully assessed. � George Johnson presented a petition requesting GEORGE JOHNSON deferring their special assessments for one PARTENWOOD • year as contemplated in statute, Chapter 429. 061, � Sub. 2 to provide more time for a reassessment of their lateral, unit and acre assessment � charges. He �elt the City did not make adequate efforts to obtain funding for the project. * Engineer Long stated that a great deal of effort � went into getting E.P.A. funding, also HUD. The E.P.A. funds had been channeled to the Metro Waste • Control and HUD funds were not available. Searles � asked Mr. Johnson to name one other agency where he felt funding would be available. Johnson + cited the Metro Sewer Commission. Johnson also felt the 60/40 formula was unfair to him, that � the formula should lean more to the unit charge than the lateral assessment. He was of the � opinion that lateral assessments on subdivisions � as Partenwood should be equal, thus those lots with odd configurations would not be penalized. i, Searles stated that the 60/40 formula was the fairest for all properties in the project. He � noted that any formula results in a slight disparity for some lots. Some formulas favor large lot '� owners, others favor small lots. The Council • has found that the 60/40 formula is most equitable. Searles noted that every property owner in the project � will argue for that formula which will result in a lower assessment for his property and a higher � assessment, therefore, for his neighbor. Front footage is used, in part, because the lot with � the most front footage is more expensive to sewer than the smaller lot and because front footage � in fact reflects the area of the lot and the use • district restrictions. A unit charge is also used in part because there can still be only � one house on any property. � Since there are lots of diverse dimensions in this project, the combination of front footage � and unit has been shown to be the fairest and . most rational. � � + r � � SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 4, 1975 Page 5 � Mr. & Mrs. A. H. Fox, 760 Tonkawa, protested A.H. FOX the lateral assessment placed on the 20 ' easement 760 Tonkawa � they had given for the project. � Councilmember Massengale noted that the 60/40 MASSENGALE � formula was not final but must still be voted upon by the Council after review of input by � staff and the citizens. � Mayor Searles and Administrator Benson announced � that the City Council and staff will have anotherspecial Council meeting starting at 4: 30 P.M. , Monday, � September 8, 1975 concerning the 73-1 assessment roll to discuss all previous and new citizen � comments. Benson stated that both City legal newspapers will be notified this meeting will be � held previous to our regular Council meeting which convenes at 7: 30 P.Pd. � • Searles asked if any citizens had any other comments at this time. There were none. � Massengale moved, Butler seconded, that the ADJOURNMENT ` meeting be adjourned at 11: 30 P.M. Motion, Ayes (3) - PJays (0) . � � � � ? � ' � i F ��_�-� Z ��-�=��z_�� Robert L. Searles, Mayor � � � Attest: � + Walter . B nson, Clerk-Administrator � � � � � � t � � � � �