Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-24-91 Special CCMLAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 1 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 Mayor Johnson called the Special Council meeting 5:00 p.m, in the City Council chambers. Present: Johnson, Hunt, Dick Johnson, Mottaz, Williams and Administrator Kueffner. z to order at Mayor Present: Wally Ebertz, Lenore Mottaz, Dick Hughes, Paul Emerson, Richard McNamara, Jack Dolan, Jim Peterson, Steven DeLapp, Corrinne Reed, Bill Woodworth, David Lang, Violet Durow, Marilyn Durow, William Durow, LouAnne Hanson, D.W. Prue, Bob Ungerman, D.Bratton, George Burkard, Dorothy Lyons, Rita Conlin, Margaret Carlson, and Ann Bucheck Mayor Johnson explained this was a special council workshop to discuss with property owners within the area proposed for a Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) the feasibility and desirability of approving this comprehensive plan amendment. Bob Ungerman, Lampert Yards, asked why the extension was 1/4 N. instead of a 1/2 mile. A 1/4 mile takes in their entire strip of the northern end of their property. Is the MUSA brought in for sewer and is it designed to service a larger area than just a 1/4 mile strip? Councilman Williams: The answer to your questions is the MUSA extension definitely to provide sewer and water to this area. Councilman Hunt: There is a debate over 1/4 mile versus 1/2 mile. The PZ evaluated the Council's proposal for 1/2 mile and came back with a recommendation for 1/4 mile with 1/2 mile bulge. This was based on their estimation of traffic, County Road 13 goes up 1/4 mile to the frontage road and County Road 19 goes up an 1/8th of a mile. Why do you think it should be a 1/4 of a mile or a 1/2 mile? Councilman Johnson: pointed out the area that was designated on the FLUMap as LB (limited business) was a 1/4 mile strip. If the strip was any wider it would be servicing business off the freeway and you would move commercial farther into the City. SAC units are called for with the existing MUSA line. We would have to borrow SAC units from Woodbury or Oakdale on a temporary basis unless another interceptor is brought up from Cottage Grove area going south thru Woodbury. There is a limit to the number of SAC units available so we cannot make this an extensive extension of the sewer service. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 2 Councilman Mottaz: I made the original motion requesting the MUSA extension 1/2 mile. At one time Lake Elmo had Section 32 defined as the MUSA area. We lost Section 32 to Oakdale so we lost all the MUSA area along with 6,000 SAC units that were assigned to Lake Elmo. We had nothing else in Lake Elmo where we were authorized.to extend the municipal services. The extension 1/2 mile north of County Road 13 and down a 1/2 mile east of 19 would replace what the City lost in Section 32. In addition to that, Woodbury has just successfully petitioned to have the MUSA line extended to the East and a 1/2 mile beyond County Road 19. This would match up with any commercial development that would take place with our neighbors to the south. Richard McNamara: Happy to see the City go ahead with this to take advantage of the MUSA. It will give the city a tax base and help reduce taxes for people who want to live here. I would be in favor of the 1/2 mile because you will get the nice office complexes and good developments that have need for a large area. The surrounding communities will take advantage of the MUSA opportunity if Lake Elmo doesn't. Martin Colon, owns 50 acres NW corner of County Road 19 and I-94 and goes back 1/2 mile, and is in favor of 1/2 mile extension if you really want quality development. The MUSA line does not obligate the City to do anything in particular. All it does is reserve those particular SAC units for the use of the City as it see fits. If you look at Minnesota Mining, Honeywell, General Mills, you see the type of properties they develop a 1/2 mile back. Real estate taxes are going to get a lot worse and it would be a benefit to all to get out there and encourage these developments of this nature to help the tax payer. The City will have to take the lead and put the ordinance into effect. Councilman Hunt: Currently Woodbury has extended their MUSA and Oakdale is gobbling up the east end. We are going to be in competition with those two cities. It is not a foregone conclusion that the Met Council will approve our full request. The City is going to make a request to the Met Council, and the City can only hope they will approve it. It is the appropriate time to make that request. ' Mayor Johnson: We want to insure the property owners that we were not conveying any false hopes or impressions about what MUSA is or what it can do. A simple extension of the MUSA does not guarantee that sewer will be extended to any property within the that MUSA area. It has been the policy of the City that extension of services would be tied to a development request, something that could support extension of services. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 3 Councilman Hunt: The current development we are looking at is at the corner of County Road 13 and 94. To physically run a pipe there and service that land is very easy but the size of the pipe has to be larger. This means the Council has to figure out a way of how to pay for that larger pipe. If you set up a plan that will call for those services and run those services out, you have to make sure all the piping is large enough to serve the total development when done. As a council we have to look into options: bonding, assessing, should we go 1/2 or 1/4 mile. Before I would vote in favor of running the pipe, I want to get feelings on how the landowners would feel about getting assessed. Martin Colon: If you put in the pipe to benefit me, I would pay a certain portion of that and accept an assessment on the property. It can't all happen for the benefit of one property owner. Dick Johnson: Is it conceivable where a large development comes in and requires the services, but the other landowners along that route do not want the service at that time, the developer pay for it. As other users are added to the line, the developer is reimbursed for that. I don't think the taxpayers of Lake Elmo want to foot the bill to get development. Martin Colon: I got into a situation where City of Mahtomedi wasn't providing the service so I got them from White Bear. It ran by a series of houses. I funded the entire project, but when the individual houses connected to the watermain I got the money thru an agreement with the city of White Bear. The mechanism is there. Bob Ungerman: It's fine for a developer to accept the costs because he can subdivide the land and sell it off in pieces. It is very tough for a business owner to absorb those costs and pass them on to the customer. It's not that we are not in favor of the extension, but you have to look at the developer versus an operating business. Mayor Johnson: Once the MUSA is in, it will be our concern as to how we can achieve our goals, which are not to insure premature assessment on non -union properties and not to give false hopes, but also to allow people who own property there achieve their goals of developing. Councilman Williams: (Addressing the operating businesses along the area) You said you are in favor of extending the sewer, but how do you pay for it. How can you do both? LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 4 Bob Ungerman: We don't want to stand in the way of developing an area and are willing to pay our fair share. You cannot look at an existing business that is going to stay there on a 10 acre lot the same as a development area off 50 acres. Councilman Williams: Are you implying that there should be a different amount compared per acre. Ungerman: I don't know. If we don't have to sign up because the sewer is going in front of us and the previous owner put in a new septic system, we may not need sewer for another 20 years. Mayor Johnson; Our goal is to make sure that you don't pay before you would otherwise have to use it. This is one of the problems we do face. Councilman Williams: I have stated in the past I am very concerned about not putting the local businesses who are already there and operating out -of -business or for the farmers to have to sell their farms if they don't want to.. I don't want to force them to have to develop to sell their businesses. Richard McNamara: Could the City Engineer look at a 1/2 mile perimeter and break down the cost per acre and show us what the cost of this would be based on the different sizing of pipe? I think the sizing of the pipe is minor when you start running this down to the benefitted parties. The benefitted parties that are going to be in here are a small percentage. You will bring in more people into that commercial corridor. The existing business people are probably going to get more business to help pay for this. It should benefit them in the long run. Mayor Johnson: I would not be adverse once we establish this area is worthwhile and get projects specific to ask this very same group to talk about it some more. Councilman Mottaz: I don't think there is anyone on the Council that want to see any businessman be put out of business or any farmers be put off their farm. There are several financial options available to us. When it comes to the final vote there is not anyone here that would be in favor of running anyone out of business or off of their farm. Mayor Johnson: The property along the freeway is uniquely situated for some type of commercial development. Property within the area that has Municipal urban services available to it is much more valuable than property that does not have. This means we can go for a higher quality of development with some size to it which could provide the tax revenue that we want. Your concern of premature assessments is our concern as well. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 5 Violet, Marilyn Durow: We are the farmers who have 60 acres. we are confused and concerned about getting assessed. Martin Colon: By going to 1/2 mile, the initial cost of any interceptor or trunk line would be spread over twice the property. Councilman Williams: If you size the facility for the 1/2 mile area, then those properties that are paying for it up front are going to pay a lot more than if it was sized for a 1/4 mile. Bob Ungerman: Could there be something put in the city council minutes that states the wish of the City Council that there would be no premature assessments. Steve DeLapp: Is the type of high quality commercial office park development comfortable with the landowners to the east of Highway 13. Martin Colon: The intersection should go into some type of retail mode. Wally Ebertz Owns property by County Road 19 and 94. I would not want to see the Council narrowly or specifically decide the land use along the frontage, but should let the marketplace dictate land use and keep an open mind. Mayor Johnson: What are the kinds of things you would not see as likely candidates for a high quality development district with reference to your property. Wally Ebertz: It is hard to see the entire stretch develop into office park use. Bob Ungerman: A lumber yard does not necessarily fit into high class office park. Jack Dolan, Dolan Marine: I came to the meeting for information, gather thoughts, and then make a decision. Dorothy Lyons: We live outside of the MUSA area. Lake Elmo is unique and concurs with the adjacent property owners in favor of 1/2 mile extension. We don't have to make the same mistakes as Bloomington or Roseville. I would like to see more business come into the area and do not want to see any leave. Asked the City Engineer to look into how land could be serviced on the north side. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 6 Councilman Williams: What happened in Section 32 we had a MUSA area, and the policy was, we will extend utilities if a proposal comes in and supports it. No proposal ever came in and still a proposal has not come in. The landowners said Lake Elmo is unwilling to work with us so we are going to Oakdale. Are we setting ourselves up for the same thing here? If we put this MUSA in and state our policy is "we will extend utilities, but only when development proposals come in that can support it", are you property owners going to say Lake Elmo is not willing to deal with us so we are going to Woodbury? Martin Colon: I for one will not. I am in Lake Elmo now and intend to stay here. I signed the petition before because we had a zoning issue. Now the zoning issue is resolved. I guarantee you I will not be signing any petition to go to Woodbury. Richard McNamara: It wouldn't hurt to put an "Open for Business Sign" out there. Lake Elmo has never had that, Oakdale and Woodbury has. Durows: Are you willing to sit down and discuss a development proposal if someone comes in? Would you consider changing zoning and some rules? This is why we signed the annexation petition because the City was unwilling to discuss it. Woodbury has done this and we have had marvelous luck with them. Councilman Hunt: The City has changed over the last 5 years and the conditions have changed. The council has to determine at what rate do the people want to see changes and improvements in this city. The Council has always been willing and, in fact, went out to solicit West Publishing with a proposal. Councilman Johnson: the purpose of tonights meeting is we want to have a dialogue and understand what your situation is, your wants are, along with all the desires of the rest of Lake Elmo. We will never solve problems unless we have a dialogue. Councilman Williams: Are there any other property owners who want to say anything regarding this annexation question because it is an extremely important question. (No response from audience). LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 7 Jim Peterson, Trail Head Development: Responding as landowner outside the MUSA, I ask the Council to consider those outside of the MUSA as effected by the issue as well as those inside the MUSA. I personally do not have any problems with your goals to solve your tax problems and encourage you to proceed. If there are any changes that would affect those outside, such as a change of the FLUmap, I ask that you let those property owners know. Those that have city services extended to their property will realize a great appreciation in property value. Those on the other side will not see that. It seems only fair that those who realize the appreciation are most able to afford any buffer required. At what point in the process is zoning addressed and would the underlining zoning that is currently in place follow this process through or would zoning be addressed at a later time. Councilman Williams: In the past it has been project specific because it was set up this way for Section 32. I am not sure that worked. The question of how the zoning is going to proceed is open. A Future Land Use Map was set up specifically for Section 32, but it wasn't rezoned. We were waiting for some one to come with a proposal consistent with the FLUmap and then rezone it. We will probably have some type of FLUmap for this area. Maybe we should rezone the entire area right from the beginning. Then it does put out the sign "Open for Business". Zoning will come later because we do not have standards for a zoning ordinance for that kind of development. Councilman Johnson: Limited Business District is a new zoning for the City. The PZ has been working on this zoning district, but it has not been passed because they are waiting until the MUSA can be determined to be extended. Martin Colon: Unisys in Eagan has a particular zoning classification called R&D, Research & Dev. The buildings are as nice and clean as any office building. This could be something to keep in mind. Also, there is a high power line going down along the mid section line with a 90' easement on his property that should be considered. Bill Woodworth, Economic Advisory Committee member, noted he has lived in Lake Elmo for 20+ years and felt this meeting was a real crossing point because people are talking to each other about the future. It is just great. The Council thanked everyone for coming. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 8 October has been officially recognized as "Domestic Violence Awareness Month", therefore the following Proclamation was made: WHEREAS, societal indifference contributes to the endangerment of women and their children, and to the mistaken belief of batterers that they are within their rights, WHEREAS, the problems of domestic violence are not confined to any one group of people but cross all economical, racial, affectional preference and societal barriers, WHEREAS, it is battered women who have been in the forefront of efforts to bring peace and equality to the home, WHEREAS, the crime of domestic violence violates an individual's privacy, dignity, security, and humanity, WHEREAS, the impact of domestic violence is wide ranging, affecting society as a whole. NOW, THEREFORE, IN RECOGNITION OF THE IMPORTANT WORK DONE BY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROGRAM, I, DAVID JOHNSON, MAYOR OF THIS CITY DO HEREBY PROCLAIM, THE MONTH OF OCTOBER, 1991, "DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH" AND URGE ALL CITIZENS TO PARTICIPATE IN SCHEDULED ACTIVITIES AND WORK TOWARD THE ELIMINATION OF PERSONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN. Resolution Commending the Lake Elmo Jaycees: M/S/P Dave Johnson/Mottaz - to adopt Resolution No. 91-31 commending all of the current and former Lake Elmo Jaycees involved in "Huff N'Puff" Days and particularly wishes to extend its appreciation and congratulations to the executive committee. (Motion carried 5-0). The Council adjourned the Special workshop at 6:35 p.m.