The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004 [06] Jun 14 {Book 31} CITY OF ST. JOSEPH . www.cityofstjoseph.com Joint Meeting St. Joseph City Council & St. Joseph Township Board June 14,2004 8:00 PM Administrator 1. 8:00 PM - Call to Order Judy 'Weyrens Discussion on proposed annexation and utility extension for the 295th area. 2. Mayor 3. Adjourn Larry J. Hosch Councilors **NOTE: THIS MEETING IS TO BE HELD AT THE ST. JOSEPH TOWNSHIP HALL** AI Rassier Ross Rieke Gary Utsch Dale 'Wick Enclosed you will find the results of the petition for annexation and the survey that . was sent to the residents along 29Sth Street. Any comments that were written are also included. ~-. 2.) College Avenue North' PO Box 668 . Saint. Joseph. Minnesota )6,74 Phone ,2. 0 . ,6,. 72.0 I lOa x ,2.0.,6,.0,42. . "C CI> ~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~CI>OOOo 00 0 0 00 0 000 ~UOOON 00 0 0 00 0 000 ~2~~~õ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~NNN ~M M ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ en~ØØØ~ øø ø ø øø ø øøø CIS c en o wxxx xx xx x x x ~ > ~~ _ r::::r:::: ::s ~~ .c.c o ~ x x x CD a::: "C ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ CD ~~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~ >ou~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~NN~ ~ ::s ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ en~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J en c ~ ~ ~ . CD CI> N '6> ~~- ~ ~ ~ - CD CIS r::::- r::::~ ~ ~ c: r:::: co . CI> ClSN- ............ ClSC'\! . N CO""" CIS -e _ ~_ _ 0 -_ ~ u.c'.c- - .c.c Q) ,^ ~CIS N > v, en CO w w ,.. >(/) CO ~ ~~ ~ ~ CI>~ ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ClSMN ~NClSN NN N CO~CIS £ m ~~ ~ ~ ~ N ::t ~ en o wxxx xxxx xx x xxx x > s::: o .- 0 x x x x x x x x x x ~ Z CO >< CD ~ s::: ~ CI> ~ r:::: E s::: ()~..... C:::s ~ ~ <C OCl> Q) CO CIS c:=- ~~ ~~ c: ~ c: (/) r:::: coQ)~ ~CI>~ Q)CI> c: m CO CI>-CI> IDC:U (/) U~uc:z~~CO~Q) E >o~"C ·_c:en ~en~r::::co ~CI>~u$~ 0 ~~o z~~ CI>~>oV>o~CO~~ CI>.....(/) I ~-~ co~- ~ E::sCl>en_.....U _co.cø Q) ClSQ)~ .....~CI> Q) ClSa::~~W~i~~§~Q)i~~§ (/)~~ ~~.c CIS~~ Zr::::::sCl>r:::: .cCl>~~.cQ)-""'w~ ~COw .....O~ ~CI> >o«~~~Q)_~COCl>C:"CCIS~~ Cl>C:CI> co.c- (/)~~ _ "C~~~r::::_~::sQ) ~COQ) ~c:r:::: CCQ)~ ::s_ ¡~~W~~mÆ~~~ecoi~E~~~~~o~CI>~~i . ~"C ~Jw' ~"C~m~>~O~~-~W~"CECIS~~ ~¡~CI>~~~~£¡t>O~CO~mr::::t~N~~¡CIS~~~ _~~~Éro>o~OE~~~Q)~E~~~¿Éo~EC:~r::::~ =_ClSOO~OClS_-OClS~Q)OOClSOOO~COCl>O-ClSCO ma::~'Jüa::~~a::~a::~O~'~~'J~~mr::::~c~ . Questions or Comments to Petition for Annexation 1. We vote yes, only if the city puts in the lift station not the homeowners each having one. 2. There are a lot of issues that have no been addressed as of this date. We felt there would be another meeting with the City to discuss more of our concerns such as: · Judy Weyrens mentioned a deferred assessment for property owners 55 and over. The assessment would be deferred until the property was sold. Tom Jovanovich confirmed the statement and told us there is no interest charged on the assessment during this period of time. We need a confirmation on this information in writing so we can fully understand it and have a record for future use. · The amounts of assessments for some of the properties are incorrect. This was confirmed from SEH, but we do not have written corrected amounts. · We cannot allow hookups for sewer from the back of our properties along the lower part of 295th Street as all of the sewers are presently in the front yards. The cost of connecting from the rear yards is almost triple of hooking up from the front, plus the additional considerable cost of repairing our yards. This would entail tearing up additional sidewalks, flowerbeds, a lot of landscaping, etc. · If we are annexed, we would like the waterline stubbed in with the sewer line, but not connected at this time to avoid digging up our . yards again in the future. · Signing this agreement at this time is like signing a blank check. The above issues need to be addressed with the neighbors. We would suggest a non-televised meeting at the town hall to encourage more residents to ask questions and not be intimidated by the cameras. · It was stated that the property owners could sell off the second lot. The intention of adding the additional building on our second lot involved a lot of planning and saving. It was planned for hobby use, especially in our retirement years. Selling that second lot off is not an option, as it would screw up our whole retirement plan. There are several neighbors in this same situation and they feel the same way wedo. . . Questions or Comments to Survey #2 1. When would assessment have to be paid? In 6months/a year? 2. We like the idea of city hook-up. It increases the value of our property. So, of course to us if we are going to pay for it in the long run, we would rather do it now while there is hope of a discount from the builders. We hope it goes through now rather than in the future at full cost. 3. If vote is taken and 60% are against, when will we see letters on votes? At next meeting? 4. What is the cost of a pumping station vs. the cost of a flow restrictor down stream? Will there be another meeting to discuss these issues? What is the time line for the project? How will you provide access to homes on 295th west of 103rd? What are the projected costs and are they accurate? 5. How much does it cost to hook up? Is that in the assessment or is that extra? How much does it cost to remove the old septic? Is that in the assessment as well or is that extra? What interest rate is the assessment at? Why do new water and roads when sewer is the only problem? What percent of the total is the town paying? Wouldn't it be cheaper for us to let the developer put his in and then just hook up to that? How are we going to get a competitive bid? Is this just some kind of easy money for the developer? 6. Because of the gas main crossing part of our property, we can not parcel off a lot once the improvements are made. We would ask that you take this into consideration in the assessment. 7. Why are we being asked to have booster pumps? If the water tower had been . built to the proper height booster pumps would not be needed. There are pressure reducing values made and used in other municipal water systems. Why would it not work here? How will you guarantee us a way in and out. Some residents have physical limitations so walking a distance would be a problem. The road is not wide enough to allow for keeping half the road open for traffic and still pile excavated dirt. Provisions need to be made for fire protection, medical assistance, etc since there is no alternate way in or out. Considering the grade of the hill, installing curb, gutter, and storm sewer seems to be only fluff. Use natural ditch drainage that exists. Can you show us how the proposed assessment can be recouped by increase in value of property? I cannot see how our value could increase by $30,000.00 on an acre of land with a two bedroom rambler (about 1,000 square feet). 8. I would like more information on state law which says the assessment can not be more than the increase in property value. Can we get an estimate of what our property values will be? .