Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9A - Delay City Sewer and Water Connections 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: November 24, 2014 AGENDA #: 9A PREPARED BY: Frank Boyles, City Manager PRESENTED BY: Frank Boyles, City Manager AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO REQUESTS BY PROPERTY OWNERS TO DELAY CONNECTION TO CITY SEWER AND WATER SERVICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTIONS 704 AND 705 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE DISCUSSION: Introduction The purpose of this agenda item is to request City Council direction with respect to connection of private properties to the city’s sanitary sewer and domestic water system in the County Road 12/Shoreline/Sunset Avenue project area. History The City completed the utility installations and mailed notice to property owners for CSAH 12 on November 8, 2013. The work for Sunset Avenue was completed and notices were mailed on March 14, 2014. City Code Section 704 provides the properties must connect to municipal water no longer than one year from its availability even if the private well continues to function. The private well can be used for all non domestic purposes for as long as it continues to function and assuming that no cross connection is made between the two water sources. Section 705 of the City Code requires the property to connect to sewer within one year of its availibility. For properties in the annexation area (as these were) the existing septic system may continue to be used if the property owner provides certification from an independent inspector that the system is compliant with current standards. This extension may be renewed every 36 months as long as the system remains compliant. Current Circumstances Our records (attached) show that there are twenty seven potential hook ups on Sunset Avenue and 15 on Shoreline Boulevard. Of these, seven properties on Sunset have not yet hooked up. For Shoreline Boulevard, six properties have not connected. The staff has received four written requests (attached) for an extension to the ordinance connection requirements identified above. Three of the requests are on Shoreline and one on Sunset. The problem is the current City Code does not provide for exceptions to the one year water hookup Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com requirement whereas a 36 month extension can be granted for sewer hook up upon an independent inspection and a confirmation that the system is compliant. So, the options to achieve compliance are: 1. Advise all parties that they must hookup to water and sewer by say July 31, 2015 and that they can defer sewer hookup for 36 months provided they have an independent inspector certify to the City that the septic system is compliant no later than March 31, 2015. The rationale for this approach includes a number of factors. The project was somewhat delayed in getting done. Last year’s winter and this years summer were not condusive to completing such work. Moreover because of the weather conditions it has become apparent that contractors are much less available to do this sort of work and if they are, the prices they quote can be greater than the residents would otherwise pay. Even with this extra time some property owners may have to rely upon the city connection process outlined below in the issues section of this report. 2. Inspect each of the properties immediately to confirm their status and cite each property which is not compliant. The rationale for this approach is the fact that with very few exceptions we have sought and accomplished utility connection within one year of availability. Once the council has allowed an extension to one party, regardless of the validity of the reason, others will make requests for reasons they see as valid and will expect the city to treat them the same. This process does not delay the collection of fees which keep the city’s funds available to pay the costs for which they are intended. 3. Amend the city code to provide for a greater time period from utility availability to connection. The amendment could, for example make the two ordinances parallel. Presently sewer connection may be deferred for 36 months if an independent inspection reveals that the system is compliant. The same thing could be done with water. As long as a water test confirms that the well water is pure, the resident can stay hooked up to the well for some span of time. The impact of such extensions is twofold. On one hand there is greater staff work to assure that inspections and certifications are accomplished on a timely basis. Second, the city’s funds must wait to receive fees. In the long run it is likely that the fees will have to increase to pay for greater finance charges associated with the extensions.This approach could also beget more requests for extension. Conclusion The city council should determine which, if any of these options, it is comfortable with. ISSUES: The assumption in all of the alternatives above where connection is not made within the ordinance prescribed time period, that all fees (see attached Process for New Sewer & Water Hook-Up) would be paid by the property owner except those which reguire the actual connection to municipal utilities. The intent is to mitigate against futher delays to reimburse city funds expended to make the utilities available to the subject properties. The financial impact of the city’s sewer, water and street projects on property owners is significant. The cost to connect most often comes on the heals of a public improvement project which the resident is paying for incrementally over a twenty year period. So the property owner has likely already experienced some financial challenges associated with paying the special assessment. Within the twenty year time frame we ask them to pay an additional significant amount to connect to water at least and sewer if their system is out of compliance. The two combined give virtually all property owners reason to ask for an extension. And that is the crux of the problem: they all have good reason to make the request so how long an extension is allowed and on what basis? If a property owner cannot connect using their own resources, the city can accomplish the work for them and specially assess the costs. The city would need to either issue citations if it were to pursue a criminal route to compliance or bring an injunction against the property owner. In either case the objective would be to obtain a court order authorizing the city to enter onto the property to complete the work. The most likely scenarios will be that a private contractor will act as the city’s agent to complete this work. The contractor will be excavating landscaped property, six or more feet deep and ultimately occupying the basement level of the property owner’s house to break through the floor, wall or both to bring in utilities. They would also have to properly abandon the existing well and septic systems. The final action will be to take the prerequisite steps to specially assess the costs against the property. Since the contractor is the city’s agent, it is possible that the city could be pulled into a a dispute regarding restoration, vandalism, or work quality as has happened with our driveway improvement projects. The city is in a precarious position here as we do not have inspectors stationed on the property full time. Finally the city council should consider what a double edged sword the quantity of properties requiring hook up can be. The greater the number, if granted, the greater precedent created. On the other hand the greater number the city chooses to complete, the more complex, burdensome and liability creating they can be. FINANCIAL From a strictly financial perspective, leaving the ordinance as is and IMPACT: mandating hook up is the most cost effective from the city’s perspective. As mentioned above however, the city would incur additional litigation, liability and other such costs by mandating connection. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Direct the staff to contact the 12 properties which have not yet hooked up or are in process to advise them they have until July 31, 2015 to do so subject to the conditions above. 2. Direct the staff to contact the 12 properties to advise that connection is expected immediately and that court proceedings will be initiated for anyone who has not pulled a permit within 30 days of the one year ordinance provision. 3. Direct that staff prepare modifications to the city code as desired by the city council. 4. Take no action and direct that the city staff research other alternatives to address this issue. RECOMMENDED As determined by the city council. MOTION: Connection Summary Sunset Avenue and CSAH 12 Sunset Avenue (Project Complete March 14, 2014) There are twenty-seven (27) potential hook-ups on Sunset Avenue. The ones that ARE NOT hooked up include: 17011 Sunset Avenue (Mark Sailer) Submitted compliance report on septic system 17081 Sunset Avenue (Stephen Wagner) No progress, In August, Homeowner informed City they are selling house 17141 Sunset Avenue (James Rockwell) No progress, Homeowner states they have contractor lined up this fall 17221 Sunset Avenue (Gene Muelken) In progress, Homeowner paid fees but has not hooked up 17261 Sunset Avenue (Jason Berry) No progress, Homeowner deciding to re-build 17311 Sunset Avenue (Kevin Gardner) No progress,submitted extension request 1711 Shoreline Boulevard (David Doehlert) No progress, Homeowner has made no contact Shoreline Boulevard (Project Complete November 8, 2013) There are fifteen (15) potential hook-ups on Sunset Avenue. The ones that ARE NOT hooked up include: 1735 Shoreline Blvd (Dana Breault) - No progress,submitted extension request 1751 Shoreline Blvd (Theodore Smits) No progress, submitted extension request,Compliance inspection revealed a non-compliant tank and drainfields, possible demolition of house 1771 Shoreline Blvd (Stephanie Risberg) No progress, Homeowner received bids for hookup 1781 Shoreline Blvd (Lesli Beauliew) In progress, Homeowner paid fees, but has not hooked up 1799 Shoreline Blvd (James Scharf) No progress,submitted extension request 1875 Shoreline Blvd (Linda Bigot) No progress, possible demolition t- /OL) TO /I�k. C56�) Foe A Lr f�-t C Mokk -7-1 m6. -Fil-/r PgOP,(-kTy Trtqx 7"yl I,%rw leO4 p 14s56s5M(-Al-f fi r pxicc W67611 T m 4fk (l,1) X O u 7-a Pt(4SC 6-(-V6 -FO COM 6 UP /OUR-5 ( 73 5 sNQ���, �� f3t v November 1, 2014 Frank Boyles City Manager—City of Prior Lake Re: Project#12-002, CR12; Shoreline Blvd. Utility Hook Up Request extension to hook up date: • The property is currently for sale. • New ownership may result in a new home structure, requiring a different hook up area. Therefore involving less distance to the street and much less cost. • Current estimate of$ 9250.00 and permit of$ 5800.00 = $15,050.00 for the present location of the hook up. Far beyond my expectation after speaking with neighbors about the cost of their projects. I do not have that amount of ready cash to pay for such a project. Therefore, requesting the install to take place after the sale, and to the new structure. That would allow only one excavation to take place to complete the project as opposed to one now and a second as soon as the new structure is in place. • Currently a winter resident in Arizona and the property is not in use as for water and sewage. Thank you in advance for your serious consideration involving this matter. Sincerely Theodore Smits Jr. Frank Boyles From: Jennifer Dull Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 4:19 PM To: Frank Boyles Subject: RE: 17311 Sunset Ave Frank, Please see the below email. When Mr. Gardner was attempting to email you, it wouldn't go through. Jenn From: Kevin Gardner[mailto:kgardner@mnpools.com] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 3:13 PM To:Jennifer Dull Subject: 17311 Sunset Ave Please forward this to Mr. Boyles, Dear Mr. Boyles, I live at 17311 Sunset Avenue I am requesting an extension for the utility connections at our home.We are currently helping a family member get into single floor living for health reasons. Our current budget is extremely tight.Will you allow us until late summer 2015 to get the utility's connected?Our current septic is in excellent shape. It wall installed NEW in 1996. Thank you for any and all consideration, Kevin Gardner 17311 Sunset Ave Shakopee, MN 55379 763.300.9003 1 CC) j- � r �Os�� � K�,� bc�n 4-c) CQA ,,V L,--)CA ck S�P�e e� b�e � c;���,\ ✓�� S� r�, � CcA C r-)0A- PROCESS FOR NEW SEWER & WATER HOOK-UP (Building Department) 10/21/13 sz 1. Have Homeowner sign the Building Permit Application 2. Before any payment, Homeowner needs to know if they will have a 5/8" Water Meter or a 1" Water Meter (the prices are different---5/8" = $480.00 + $110.00 for water reducer= total of $590.00 or 1" Meter = $590.00 + $150.00 = $740.00). Building Permit#, Sewer & Water Permit# & Plumbing Permit # will all have same PERMIT NUMBER. Assign the # in next sequence in Building Permit Roster. 3. For 2013* Fees are: a. SAC Charge $2435.00 b. Sewer & Water Connect Fee $1500.00 c. Water Tower Fee $1000.00 L Total $4935.00 d. Sewer/Water Permit Fee $ 56.50 e. Plumbing Permit Fee 5 54.50 L Total $5046.00 $5046.00 f. Water Meter & Reducer 5/8" 590.00 Total $ 5636.00 OR V $ 740.00 Total $5786.00 4. Complete a receipt for monies paid by Homeowner & give a copy to Homeowner. 5. Make sure Homeowner understands that the Sewer & Water Contractor & the Plumbing Contractor MUST sign the respective form even though the Homeowner is paying the fee. PERMIT# CANNOT BE ASSIGNED UNTIL HOMEOWNER AND BOTH CONTRACTORS HAVE SIGNED THE RESPECTIVE FORMS. *2014 Fees will increase by $50.00 for the SAC Charge. Other potential fee increases are not yet known.