Agenda - Public Works Committee - 05/15/2007

Home

Case #4: Review Pondvale Feasibility Study Civil Engineer II Linton stated the Pondvale development is located east of CSAH 5 Nowthen Boulevard across from -Ramsey Elementary School. The plat was developed with well and septic lots platted to permit division when sewer and water became available. Several petitions have been presented requesting extension of City services to the area. Each of the projects was canceled when counter petitions against the project were received. A petition was received in January 2007 requesting the feasibility study be updated. The City Council approved updating the feasibility study pending receipt of a $1,500 escrow from the residents to cover the cost of the study if the project is not constructed. The escrow was r~ceived and the feasibility study was ordered. The study has been completed and was presented to the residents in an Open House on April 12, 2007. Mr. Linton indicated there are 8 property owners controlling twenty-four 24 parcels. The assessment numbers in the report are based on the 24 lots and contemplated removing the drainage and utility easements encumbering two of the parcels when an outlet for the pond is provided. This would require acquiring a drainage and utility easement from a neighboring landowner and is not included in the study. Staff recommends redistributing the cost over 22 lots, raising the rate per lot to $19 ,409 ~64 from $17,792.17. Sewer and water fees for these two lots would need to be determined in the future if the drainage and utility easement were to be abandoned by the City. Mr. Linton stated current development standards require construction of ponds to retain and treat stormwater before it can be discharged to a wetland or a stream. Ponds without outlets must be sided to hold back to back 100 year events. There currently is a ponding area on the lots covered by the drainage and utility easement, it does not have an outlet and consequently the new pond was sized to retain back to back 100 year events. The pond sizing calculations were based on homes being built on all of the lots in the subdivision and the new streets and sidewalks. The stormwater will be routed to the pond through the storm sewer system. Civil Engineer II Linton stated the feasibility study proposed extending water, sewer and storm sewer to all of the lots in the development. Helium Street in the Meadow development to the north was constructed at 38 feet wide to provide additional width for parking when a school is built on the site. The feasibility study contemplated constructing Helium Street and 150th Lane from Helium Street to CSAH 5 to this width with the City picking up the cost for 6 feet of pavement. The City would also pay the difference between 12 inch and 8 inch watermain in 150th Lane. The residents would be responsible for the sidewalk paralleling the widened street. This is consistent with the direction received for the 157th Lane Feasibility Study. Civil Engineer II Linton indicated 6 of the 8 property owners were in attendance at the open house and were generally opposed to the project in it's present form. The primary proponent for the project did not attend the meeting. One resident came and spoke to staff on Aprill0t\ and also came to the meeting and expressed the same concerns. The comments received focused on lack of benefit to the residents, concern that the proposed extra street width is being forced on them by the Meadow development, taking of the lots for ponding and sidewalk being forced on them. Mr. Linton stated the residents that signed the petition were envisioning a project that would generally be confined to Helium Street and 150th Lane east of Helium Street to the eastern plat boundary. This would be a smaller project and would require re-excavation of the street in the future if the remainder of the development requested sewer and water. Confining the project Iiublic Works Committee / April 17, 2007 Page 4 of 18