Agenda - Charter Commission - 04/18/1996

Home

in the case of uses declared as nonconforming after the fact. A sewer connection requirement in a previously rural environment may be similar. In the case of water, the property may continue to operate the well even after connection to the municipal services. Therefore, the same amortization needs do not seem to exist. The question still remains, however, as to what degree the utility customer should subsidize the beneficiary of a liberal connection deferment? Also, if a deferment is allowed, what has the City lost but lack of opportunity for water sales through infrastructure assumably already paid for (or assessed to) by the benefitted pro. perty? Finally, in any case, in a deferment, should not all parties be availed of the opporturaty of a date certain at which the connection must be made (all parties meaning the City, existing customer base and the new customer)? The City conducts water system planning based upon projections of customer number by type (residential or commercial) and peak water usages. The City then constructs specific pipe sizes, wells and towers based upon these projections. Lack of connection to the system by potential customers does not allow for the most effective use of this infrastructure. Small numbers of customers not connected will not be noticed. The result, however, of the extreme example of connection deferments could be devastating to the existing customer base and the infrastructure their fees support. Therefore, an absolute date certain, at which time the connection is made, must be part of the policy. Cl'he same exists for the sewer but to a less noticeable degree in that our system only includes pipe.) The Cities ofAndover, Champlin and Elk River ali have two-year connection requirements. Apparently none of these cities assess the connection charges. Only Elk River has a provision for consideration of an extension of the two-year time frame. Ramsey currently has a one-year extension opportunity for connection and we will assess the cost over a ten-year period. Hence, Ramsey is already more liberal than its neighbors in this area. The proposed policy allows a connection deferment perhaps beyond the three years noted above. If the property in question is seven years old or older, the proposed policy does not provide additional consideration. Newer properties could receive up to an additional seven years. In the case of the Haubrich Addition, three of the homes were built in 1993., one in 1990, and one earlier. Hence, the project opponents would have until 2003 to connect under this policy, g*'7 oM~ Given the above discussion, we have suggested elimination of the public improvement deferment in the policy but have retained the connection deferment. This policy, then, becomes the most liberal of any of our neighboring communities but at the same time does not subject the existing utility customers to an undue burden to the benefit of a few. CounciI Action: Motion to adopt the Connection Requirement Policy as amended.- Reviewed by: Copies also distributed to: City Adrniniswator Finance Officer City Attorney CC: 10/24/95 /jmt