Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout[04] Stearns Electric pi\A-Ai'^Ct?" cm' OF fiT. . ioSKPH Counal Agenda Item 4 MEETING DATE: September 29, 2010 AGENDA ITEM: Stearns Electric — Request for Water SUBMITTED BY: Administration BOARD /COMMISSION /COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Stearns Electric has purchased property near the City Filtration Plan (see attached map). The property they purchased is not included in the Orderly Annexation Area so the City does not have planning authority or rights. Stearns Electric will be construction a facility that includes an 11,000 square foot office space and a 23,000 square foot warehouse facility. They are in the process of completing the land use requirements of Stearns County and are in the process of designing the building. During the design phase of the project, the project representative Galen Kabe and Stearns Electric representative Dave Gruenes are exploring the opportunities for water. The building will most likely be sprinkled and to provide enough water a well will need to be drilled and a large holding tank will need to be installed. As an alternative to using well water, the representatives are questioning if the City would consider allowing the extension of water services to the facility. The cost of the extension would be borne by Stearns Electric and the line extension would include public lines that could be used for future development. Stearns Electric is not looking to annex the property, rather enter into an agreement for water services. This is merely in the exploratory stages and even if the City would say yes, they will complete a cost / benefit analysis to see which method is the best. However, before they expend time and energy into looking at the cost of City water the Council needs to determine if such would be allowed. The decision to extend water is a policy decision of the City Council, whereas sewer is owned by St. Cloud and we have an agreement which requires all property serviced to be within the municipal boundaries of the City. Typically the City would not want to establish a policy whereby properties could receive a service without annexing. However, in the case of Stearns Electric the staff considered the following factors: • Stearns Electric provides a public utility, much like the City providing water and sewer. It is such that an exception could be made. • Stearns Electric has partnered with the City in the past helping start economic development. Stearns Electric providing funding assistance for the sewer extension in the Industrial Park in 1992. • The extension of the water line will be an asset to the City for future development. We will already have the infrastructure in the ground. 4:1 If the City decides to allow the extension of water without annexation, the following needs to be determined: • Stearns Electric would like to enter into an agreement whereby they would recoup the costs of extension of the water line in the event that other users use the main that they paid to extend. The City already does this for the Graceview Estates Development. Heid and Herges are reimbursed if the City receives funds for utility extensions for the southern utility lines. We have reimbursed them on one occasion already. • The water access charge is estimated to be $ 29,000. It may be the request of Stearns Electric to make payment over a three year period, similar to Coborns. • Would the City changing the policy form ductile iron to PVC pipe. Staff indicated that ductile iron is the standard and it would be difficult to deviate from this policy. BUDGET /FISCAL IMPACT: ATTACHMENTS: Request for Council Action 4:1 -2 Site Map 4:3 Project Layout 4:4 REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION: The Council must determine whether Stearns Electric would be able to access City Water, without annexation, if the cost benefit analysis indicates that to be the best alternative. 4:2 Stearns Electric Facility Highlighed area is property purchased by Stearns Electio, less the location of the house. /----- I J . I I 1 w i r f 1 t }. 1 ..., I ., gm, - -- 1 144 f 1 1 t S k • Copyright tL.SEH 2003 01 1853ft Disclaimer: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data from city, county, state and federal offices, and is to be used for reference purposes only. 4:3 https:// portal. sehinc. com /sehsvc/html /dvo /mapLayout.htm 9/24/2010 f Z l l :;' I mo. m ' f n 1 10111 ' J �� y It* a i. 7`4 I- 'i f 'I p a 51 t it i 1 ' P . �. .� q I= 11. # J u t,� z I_ , t - - ) I .. L ,. ' \ ) . ! i bit i r t i \ � i i lf pUh .\ I I li „III' / I V 1 I 1 i li!1� Fr--- - -- .� - -- b l l� l lyllit i,,'Iq,I I I i ' l , r/ °1` 1 04 it . . ., , .� —. , l 10 y �I I 1fl , ;� ,.. ,, r i , , , , , li ; ....._....,.,. .9,,.., , , , L 1110i,..;,...,, ZI ITI Ir E ■ ' Z r : A , I 0 :I 0 I 11 : ∎ -n 0 is %' •1: : l G 1 : :i z Cl) l' ' i 33 i 1 C i ,! ; ... ....,...,„........... ...... .. . . .„ .„„ :i n li . :i i• :i 0 3 �, £�I STEARNS ELECTRIC _F; sna € ill ; DISTRICT OFFICE BUILDING a t Iisi; 5 f. m i N , STEARNS COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3 p 1 1 4:4 Sarah Bialke From:Judy Weyrens Sent:Tuesday, October 12, 2010 12:56 PM To:Sarah Bialke Subject:FW: Stearns Electric Request for Water Access From: Michael McDonald [mailto:mmmcdonald@charter.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 10:57 AM To: Judy Weyrens; Al Rassier; Bob Loso; Dale Wick; Renee Symanietz; Steve Frank Subject: Stearns Electric Request for Water Access I hope the city does NOT decide to sell city utilities to an unincorporated area (new Stearns Electric Bldg). It really makes no sense to grant their request. Even though that piece of property lies outside the Orderly Annexation Area, it is contiguous to the city and 100% of the land-owners could petition for annexation. I read about this when it went before the Stearns County Board, I was surprised that the they were not seeking annexation first. I believe it is far past the time for the city to have a more aggressive annexation policy. Future funds from the state of Minnesota will become tighter, present property values are going down, new buildings are at an historic low. It is time to expand the cities sights on solutions to our budget problems from your current emphasis on either cutting services and expenses, borrowing funds, and continued raised taxes. Please deny this request and demand annexation if the sight wants city water services. Hopefully it would be a first step towards a policy of annexation of property that is within Zone 1 and 2 of the Orderly Annexation Area and far easier to accomplish. It is frustrating to see the township areas that are contiguous to the city get a lot of side benefits by neighboring us but yet not chipping in to help pay for those benefits. At times it seems like the objective of being friends with our neighboring St. Joseph Township far outweighs the fact that the council is responsible for managing the business of being a city. In these harsh economic times, if both objectives cannot be met, it is time to become better stewards of St. Joseph City residents tax dollars. Thanks, Mike McDonald 1