HomeMy WebLinkAbout[04a] Minutes - Oct 22
October 22, 2014
Page 1 of 3
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in special session
on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 at 4:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall, opening the meeting with the
Pledge of Allegiance.
Members Present: Mayor Rick Schultz, Councilors Renee Symanietz, Dale Wick, Steve Frank, Bob Loso,
City Administrator Judy Weyrens
City Representatives: City Engineer Randy Sabart, Public Works Director Terry Thene,
Others Present: Tom Klein, Cory Ehlert, Kevin Cox
Oversizing cost sharing, Rivers Bend 3: Schultz stated the purpose of the special meeting is to consider
a request of Cory Ehlert and Kevin Cox to cost sharing in the storm sewer oversizing of Rivers Bend Plat
3. Schultz requested Sabart present on overview of the project.
Sabart stated that Rivers Bend 3 is a part of the preliminary plat approved in 2005 for Arcon
Development. Unfortunately the development was stalled due to the housing crash. In 2007 utilities were
extended to allow for the construction of Kennedy School; therefore a portion of the Arcon Development
has water and sewer readily available. Sabart stated that Ehlert and Cox are looking to take advantage
of the existing infrastructure and have purchased a portion of property from Arcon to develop with single
family homes. Ehlert and Cox are not changing any plans that were approved in 2005; rather they are
developing a phase of a larger development.
Sabart presented maps that illustrated the phase to be developed. While the water and sewer have been
installed, storm water has not. The initial plan was designed with a large holding pond south of Kennedy
School. As the pond is located upstream of the development, all the stormwater pipes required for the
individual phases is larger than the typical storm water infrastructure. The developer is requesting the
City participate in the oversizing costs.
Loso questioned if the oversizing is at the beginning or end of drainage and where the holding pond will
be located. Sabart stated that all of the storm water infrastructure will be oversized due to the location of
the permanent pond. Sabart stated that the overall Arcon development initially had the pond developed
south of the Kennedy School. However the larger pond is not yet constructed. There is a temporary pond
that the current developer would like to draw from which is currently sitting on 6 or 7 other lots. In the
future, in order for those lots to be developed, the temporary pond will have to go away.
Loso questioned if the small pond is part of the larger pond. Sabart stated that it is not. The larger pond
will be located southwest of CR121 and west of Kennedy School.
Ehlert stated that the property he and Cox have purchased will be developed in two phases and phase
two of the development would require relocation of the temporary pond. For the first phase it would be
more cost effective to use the current system that is feeding out of the temporary pond rather than
starting all over.
Schultz questioned if they are going to be following Arcon’s development plans. Cox stated it would not
be cost-effective to change the development plans. Ehlert added there may be some reconfiguration of
the lots as some are irregularly shaped.
Cox stated that because the pipe will have to absorb all future developed in that area, it will need be a
bigger pipe, which will cost more money. Typically pipes are between 12-18 inches. With this
development it will be a 48 inch pipe which, dramatically increasing the cost.
Frank stated he has read through information regarding green-step cities. He questioned what steps the
city would need to take to strive towards becoming a green-step city. Sabart stated that a rain garden in
combination with systems that collect rain water from the roofs to be used for irrigation or gardens would
October 22, 2014
Page 2 of 3
make the project green. The goal in those instances is to reduce the size of pipes. He added there is still
a need for storm water pipes and storm water ponds.
Loso questioned if hypothetically, the development was redone, would the size of the piping be able to
reduce in size. Sabart stated there are many areas that need to be looked at, such as the types of soil. In
addition for this project, there is off-site runoff that needs to be taken in account.
Weyrens questioned if the sizing of the pipe could be reduced if the amount of development prior to
construction of the larger pond was reduced. Sabart stated that a size needs to be picked now and the
decision should include any future developments. Ehlert stated that phases of development are following
the already constructed sewer. Prior to phase two, the temporary pond will need to relocated.
Wick questioned what portion of the development would be the likely to develop. Sabart stated that the
areas that currently have sewer and water installed would be the most attractive to future developers.
Wick questioned what the average life of the storm water pipelines. Sabart stated that it would be about
40-50 years. Even the temporary pipelines will have a longer life than 10 years.
Ehlert stated there are a lot of lots out there and potential development for the next 12-15 years. He
added it would benefit the City greatly.
Sabart stated he has not received an estimate of the cost of oversizing. Ehlert presented a listing of costs.
Cox stated that without oversizing the pipe it would cost $56,000. Because of the oversizing, the cost
goes up almost $100,000. Cox stated they are still willing to put in the piping themselves but are asking
the City to help pay for the materials. The material cost is $76,000 which includes the sizing and the
manholes.
Weyrens stated that per the City Attorney, the developer is supposed to hold the cost and the City would
recoup it. It is at the Council’s discretion whether to allow it to get paid back to the developer. Cox stated
that they cannot proceed with the development without help from the City.
Loso questioned if the Council is being questioned to change the assessment policy. Weyrens stated that
it is one of the options. Cox stated that there are other creative ways to work with to get the development
done. Frank stated that he doesn’t feel the City’s rules and regulations are not what drove lot prices up,
rather the result of the market crash.
Ehlert stated the development is a result of the EDA Round Table that was held where concerns
regarding future developments in the City rose. Ehlert stated that he is aware that the funding used to pay
for the installation of services for the Arcon property has a positive balance and he, as well as Arcon is
requesting that those funds be used for the future development. Weyrens clarified that there is a residual
fund balance of approximately $ 150,000; however, the Council has previously agreed to place that
balance in the debt service fund. It is not uncommon for the City to have residual funds in a bond
improvement, and the Development Agreements clearly indicate that the City receives any residual
balance. .
Schultz questioned if there was a park dedication fee. Ehlert stated that they are going to be putting in a
sidewalk that would connect to the trail extension out on CR121. Schultz added it could be funded
through sales tax money. Wick stated he would not be ok with that. Wick questioned if a similar situation
would happen with the development of phase 2 and 3. Oversizing would need to occur in all three
phases.
Ehlerts main concern is to price the lots competitively. Weyrens questioned if extending the $5,000
WAC/SAC disbursement would help, or does the cost have to be taken off at the beginning. Ehlert stated
he would like to keep the discussion around the oversize charges.
Both Wick and Schultz agreed that something needs to be changed. They are unsure what the solution
would be. Sabart stated there are two commonly used methods in dealing with oversize fees. The first is
October 22, 2014
Page 3 of 3
levied deferred assessments which are paid back to the City, or the costs are carried with the trunk
charge that the developer pays as land develops. Weyrens questioned Sabart if the City charges a trunk
fee for oversizing for this development to the remaining lots, if those developments won’t also have
oversizing costs. Sabart stated that future development will also be required to install similar sizes of
pipes, so yes, they would be paying for oversizing as well.
Cox stated that he does not disagree with the design of the storm water system as it makes sense. The
varying elevations and poor quality of soil require a substantial storm water system. In fact, if they cannot
install the storm water infrastructure this fall, they will have to wait until June or July with building permits
delayed to August/September.
Schultz stated he would like to see the City carry the charges and then as development occurs, get paid
back. Sabart stated that staff can meet with the developer and look at establishing a trunk charge for the
entire development; similar to what was done for the lift station.
The general consensus of the Council is to have another meeting to make a decision after additional
information is available.
Schultz adjourned the meeting at 4:59PM.
Adjourn:
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
This page intentionally left blank