09/08/2003 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2003 APPROVED 336 as an oversight and noted this is a very small and focused area while the Comprehensive Plan is a .337 very broad perspective. However, he agreed that in a perfect world this would have been addressed in 338 the Comprehensive Plan. 339 340 Councilmember Reinert stated it appears this project continues an on-going desire to complete a plan 341 that has been in process for a long period of time. He reviewed the concern by Chad Borsheim who 342 owns Lot 15, about the ability to sell in the future and not encumber the future buyer. Councilmember 343 Reinert noted that it appears the requirement to connect will result from the failure of the existing 344 system, not from a future action to sell the property. 345 346 City Planner Smyser stated Lino Lakes is very reluctant to force residents to connect to utilities and 347 pay assessments and, if someone does not want to connect, the City has found a way for informal 348 deferral of the costs until they do connect. However, what a buyer wants to do is completely out of 349 the City's control. City Planner Smyser advised that Lino Lakes does not require a point-of-sale 350 inspection of the septic system. However, more often the buyer's lender will require an inspection 351 prior to the bank signing the mortgage. 352 353 Councilmember Reinert stated if utilities are connected, the value of the property should also 354 increase. He noted that since the City does not require utility connection upon sale, there should be 355 no concern of selling. 356 357 Councilmember Carlson noted that Mr. Borsheim's lot is differently shaped than those being 358 developed and asked if it could be split into two lots. City Planner Smyser reviewed the dimensions ift359 of the lot and stated that it could potentially be divided down the middle but not divided into four lots 60 since there is no roadway to the rear. 361 362 Councilmember Carlson noted the Charter does not allow the City to assess beyond what the property 363 would increase in value. Also the Bisel Amendment would provide Mr. Borsheim with some 364 protection. 365 366 Community Development Director Grochala stated the Bisel Amendment is predominantly used 367 when sewer and water is being extended for either a new development or a city trunk utility project 368 past existing developed properties than do not have city utilities. In those cases, the City does not levy 369 assessments against properties abutting the improvements. In the event that the existing house does 370 connect, they pay a connection charge, based on standard R-1 or R -1X minimum lot width and 371 minimum lot area requirements. That adjustment recognizes that it receives the same benefit as 372 another single-family lot. Should that lot subdivide in the future, it would then be additionally 373 assessed. 374 375 Mayor Bergeson stated the Council made a decision on Arlo Lane to put it into place and that sewer 376 and water lines were adequate to serve both sides of the street. He stated if that decision had been 377 made at the same time as the Comprehensive Plan, he believes this area would have been included as 378 well as full lots down to the street since the practice was to not split one piece of property into two 379 different zonings or growth time tables. He stated that when the decisions on Arlo Lane were made, a 380 commitment was made to the development as proposed. He agreed that it does not line up with all 381 the Comprehensive Plan amendments but the case can be made that this is not a brand new concept or 82 alteration of the Comprehensive Plan but, rather, a clean-up of details on the edge of an area that was 1,83 not as clearly defined when the Comprehensive Plan was put together. 8