Loading...
03-20-1995 Special Meeting MinutesSPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING RE: STORMWATER DRAINAGE - PUBLIC HEARING MARCH 20, 1995 Mayor Norman F. Freske will call the Meeting to order. Mayor Freske called meeting to order at 7:01 PM. ROLL CALL: Mayor Norman F. Freske, CM Larry Fournier, CM Ron Black, CM Suzanne Ackerman, CM Vern Heidner. STAFF: Attorney Andy MacArthur, Engineer Larry Koshak, Clerk/Zoning Administrator, Elaine Beatty, Deputy Clerk, Judy Hudson. :r- -.s .1. el a :1• U.. :v1 lk : •1 - Purpose is to go over what the city is proposing for stormwater cost and assessments and how to support a drainage policy within the city. Based upon the engineering study the City has agreed to address these issues. Basically these issues are the costs. The intent is to give the City the broadest range to be able to collect. The City is also considering establishing separate districts. Within these districts the City has the ability to implement a tax for improvements. The City is looking at an impact fee on development. To implement these we have two Ordinance Amendments and two Proposed Resolutions. Mr. MacArthur explained that we are not here tonight to establish fees. The purpose of this meeting is propose the legal framework and rational for the fee. A public hearing will be held for setting the fees. Mr. Koshak said that the City is developing the framework to finance potential projects and problems that arise from the stormwater drainage issue. It is part of policy development that was initially incorporated in the storm drainage study which has been presented to the Council. Mr. Koshak's recommendations are now being considered for implementation in the form of Ordinance Amendments, changes to Subdivision Ordinances, and Establishment of Policies. Mr. Koshak explained the methods of financing are basically in two divisions. 1. Annual Financing Method - periodic charge based on an annual fee for all residents and parcels for the purposes of operation, maintenance and repair of existing systems. This also involves the establishment of the Utility Fee or can be done through the taxing district method. 2. Assessment Method -Short term projects - based upon the benefit to the property, impact fees charged to developers, also to Conditional Use Permits, PUDs, lot splits or any land use changes. 1 (7 PM) - A proposed amendment to the assessment Ordinance pertaining to Stormwater .•- : - 11-1 '• Mayor Freske opened Hearing at 7:11 PM. Mayor Freske asked if proper notice and publication has been completed. Elaine Beatty stated yes. a Explanation by Attorney MacArthur and Engineer_Koshak Mr. MacArthur briefly explained the Ordinance Amendment and indicated that the main thrust of the Ordinance Amendment was that assessments will be determined on the Equivalent Square Footage Method. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING RE: STORMWATER DRAINAGE Page 2 Larry Koshak explained that the Equivalent Square Footage Method basically considers the area that is being drained and considers the type and use of land. There is a method and approach to do that. '.0 •.- 4, .•• .• Denise McAlpine, 8507 Nashua Avenue asked wht type of drainage are you talking about, rain water, natural resource drainage, building drainage? Larry Koshak responded that this is dealing with stormwater drainage that results from rainfall that runs off the surface of the land. It doesn't account for rwith surface water drainage, fall and snow fall that is pponding, bsorbed into the ground. These Amendments and Resolutions deal runoff, and storm sewers. Mrs. McAlpine asked if rainfall is considered a natural resource, has there ever been a tax on natural resource? Mr. Koshak explained that land before settlement had a natural process that handled runoff. Upon development, the impervious surface created additional conditi oe to ns that disrupted sonal the tyaln al runoff and require culverts and ponding. Development g the process Governments need to manage the runoff. Mrs. McAlpine expressed her concern that she didn't cause the rain to come down and now she is going to be taxed because of it. She also questioned the sectioning on the map. Mayor Freske said that the district hearings will be held on April 3rd but now we are trying to establish a mechanism to be able to do taxing. Mrs. McAlpine still questioned if are no eCaxing a ity can n tural resource.a natural resource? Mr. MacArthur stated that weWhat the City is taxing is the maintenance of culverts etc. as a result ores have been place on and causedtheir wateptto flow roperty. The fee is for the area of lands that structures somewhere else. The fee is based upon on impervious soakable for water. property. Mrs. McAlpine asked if imperyious means non- City Council said yes. Mrs. McAlpine asked if this will be a special assessment on their taxes. Mr. Koshak said that this isn't an assessment but a method of which to assess by an Equivalent Square Footage. Mrs. McAlpine asked how they would be billed. Mayor Freske explained that this is a mechanism to establish a tax if there would be a project. Andy MacArthur explained that the fee would be on the taxes or billed from the city. The assessment and tax would come in when you have a specific project. The fee is for on going maintenance. Mrs. McAlpine asked if when you have a road assessment would this in be in addition tot e assessment you already have? Attorney said yes if there is a project being done. These are separate items. Mrs. McAlpine asked if it would include anybody whether they own 1 acre or 150 acres. Mr. MacArthur replied yes. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING RE: STORMWATER DRAINAGE Page 3 CM Fournier motioned to closed the Hearing on the Proposed Amendment to Ordinance 24-1 Regarding Storm Water. Seconded by CM Ackerman. All in favor. Motion carried. Mayor Freske declared Hearing closed. 2. 7:05 PM - A proposedAmendment to the Utility Ordinance Establishing the Stormwater Drainage System as a Public Utility. Mayor Freske opened Hearing at 7:26 PM Mayor Freske asked if all proper noticing and publishing had been done. Elaine Beatty stated yes. a. Explanation by Attorney and Engineer. Mr. MacArthur explained that this amendment to the existing utility ordinance is for the purposes of adding the Stormwater sewer and drainage system as part of the utility system. This has to be legally done to establish a utility fee. The Municipal Utility will include rates for services. This sets up the legal framework of the Ordinance for the Resolution to establish the fee. b. Public questions and answers There were no comments. Mayor Freske - Close the Hearing CM Black motioned to closed the Hearing on the Amendment to Ordinance 12-1 Establishing Municipal Utilities, Rules and Regulations Regarding Utilities, Rates and Charges and Collection of Utility Payments. Seconded by CM Heidner. All in favor. Motion carried. Discussion: CM Heidner referred to page 2, 12-1-3, the part that states the "City Engineer shall determine if the public water, sanitary sewer, or storm water sewer and/or drainage systems are assessible to the premises requesting installation or hook up." CM Heidner asked if the City Council could override this. Mr. Koshak said yes, what the Engineer does is provide professional information to the City Council for decision making. City and establishing City Policy for Responsibility for Construction of Drainage Improvements within new Subdivision. Mayor Freske opened Hearing at 7:30 PM. Mayor Freske asked if the proper noticing and posting had been done. Elaine Beatty stated yes. a. Explanations by Attornend Engineer The Attorney explained that this Resolution is establishing city policy. The first part of the policy is when a developer comes in, they will be required to present to the City Engineer the information the engineer needs to decide what type of drainage improvements are needed within the proposed land use change. The developer will have to enter into a agreement and security to make sure the project is completed and paid for. SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING RE: STORMWATER DRAINAGEPage 4 The second part as a condition of approval of land use change affecting the drainage, the applicant will dedicate all necessary drainage easements related to the impact of the land use change. The third part is that prior to approving any land use change that affects the drainage, the applicant or developer will be required to pay to the City (based upon the feasibility study or engineer study) the drainage improvements fees. Mr. Koshak stated the primary controlling item for stormwater runoff is not to have any runoff of any water greater than what was there. Any increases the developer would have to provide ponding or pay a Impact Fee for additional runoff. we Mayor Freske wanted a clarification that whatwas published showed five n tonight have four hearings. Attorney said originally the Number 3 hearing was brokedown into two it has been combined. b. Public questions and answers. Loran Nagel, 8102 Needham said that the Hall's Addition was drained, the line will take just so much water. If someone goes in and develops more land, and the runoff is more than line can handle, will they build a ponding area? Mr. Koshak said they will either build a pond or give the City funds to build whatever is needed to minimize the impact on the present Hall's pond. Mr. Nagel stated then that the residents can be assessed for lateral servicer development.n't be charged again fomore they were Mr.Koshak explained that they assessed for the trunk going to river. Mr. Nagel then asked what if someone goes down and builds another 100 houses, blacktop drives etc. and the trunk line won't handle that water, who pays for the enlargement? Mr. Koshak replied that the impact will be determined on how big the development will be. If the development is a larger one, the individual will probably put a pond on the site. There would probably be some impact charges to the developer for off site conditions. Hall pond is in need of improvements for additional storage areas. Mr. Nagel - Who pays for that? Mr. Koshak said those fees are generated from the developer in the area or generated from an annual utility fee. Mr. Nagel said those people who paid into the Hall's Drainage could conceivably be paying again? Mr. Koshak replied yes for local storm sewer utility. Mr. Nagel asked what do you mean local storm sewer? Mr. Koshak said for lateral system, if the street is improved or if some condition requires that a pipe runs out of a specific Hall's area, that particular area would have to pay for the pipe. Mr.Nagel asked if the road is widened by his place, would it cost him more for that additional runoff.is improved and Mr. Koshak expressed that may not be a good example,urea but there may be the roasome need to installrb and gutter is put in and there is a large impact on your additional facilities to take the water off and put it in storage. Those costs would be a lateral cost to you. SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING RE: STORMWATER DRAINAGE Page 5 Mayor Freske asked the Engineer if at the time these residents put in their own drainage system, if we would have had this mechanism in place, would that project have worked differently with the City. Mr. Koshak said at that time we had proposed an assessment and it was reviewed as exceeding the benefit to their property. We could have used the mechanism of the taxing district. Denise McAlpine asked what about up stream, are they paying anything with water coming downstream? Mr. Koshak said we only have jurisdiction in Otsego. The Otsego Cr ek arhority is a composite of two communities. The Authority was created problems paying their fair share. CM Fournier motioned to close Hearing for the proposed Resolution Establishing City Policy for Collection of a Fee for Storm Water Impact upon Subdivision or Increase of Impervious Surface of property with the City, and Establishing City Policy for Responsibility for Construction of Drainage Improvements with New Subdivisions. Seconded by CM Heidner. All in favor. Motion carried. 4. 7:15 PM - A Proposed Resolution Establishing City Policy for Establishing a Stormwater Drainage User Fee Througjiout the City.. Mayor Freske opened Hearing at 7:45 PM. He asked if the proper noticing and publishing was done. Elaine Beatty replied yes. a. Explanation by Attorneyand Engineer Attorney briefly explained this Resolution is to establish the surface water management impact fee with the City of Otsego. This Ordinance establishes City Policy that a fee be established. A utility fee under MN Statutes 444 which would be put on all residential lots in the City and related to the amount of impervious surface based upon Standard Residential Equivalent Parcel. This Hearing tonight does not establish an amount. Mr. Koshak briefly explained the Residential Equivalency Parcel (REP) referring the attached exhibits as overheads. b. Public questions and answers Mayor Freske called for questions. He said that before any fees are set, there would be a Public Hearing. Jeff Chouinard 8606 Ogren Avenue asked how are these projects currently be taken care of and maintained and what dollars are being used. Mr. Koshak said that a lot of drainage ways are not being maintained. This has been a problem and currently is being done on an as needed basis. Increased runoff is becoming more of a problem with less ability to take care of water. Mr. Chouinard said that then there is nothing in place to take care of these situations. Mayor Freske said no there isn't, except for the Otsego Creek Area. We are starting to, in that area. SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING RE: STORMWATER DRAINAGE Page 6 Mr. Chouinard added one other point, some of the areas with water have been constantly rising. There has been new construction to the East, but nothing around me that was mapped out in the paper. How can this pond keep getting bigger with no new construction? Water has been diverted off of Oakwood Avenue and running into the Hall's Ponds. How can those situations be cuffed? How can water be held up in those areas?(up in the hill side area) Are these guidelines set in stone or are they brought up as deemed necessary? Mr. Koshak said part of the solution is in the study. One of the things we have is permission from the DNR. Everything we do with wetlands, we have to are talon othrough the 4W. (LuconicDpo d)nd they won't Thatpond will allow us to dig deeper or disturb wetlands. We g be diverted, when funds are available, to the Otsego Creek. That pond has been an influence to the Hall's Pond. Mr. Chouinard asked if that will lessen the load into Halls Pond? Mr. Koshak replied yes. Mr. Chouinard asked if the people around the Hall's area will be responsible for this project? Mr. Koshak said that the City hasn't determined that yet. Mr. Koshak said that one thing we are trying to do in the Hall's area is minimizes the impact, trying to reduce the water impact. Tim Neibling 15694 NE 90th Street. His concerns were with the lengthy process of computing fees, if this would be a one time fee, to get this off the ground where will money come from initially and will the fee lessen as we go along. How will we pay for the initial costs to compute the unit cost? Mr. Koshak said primarily, the residential lots will be easy, they will get one unit, that only pertains to the annual fee. The Council can change this every year, this will go towards existing operations maintenance costs. If, in your area, there would be a major project, pipes, storage areas etc. there would be a project initialized under the assessment ordinance. You would receive an assessment based on benefit. Tim; we compute a unit cost, say my unit cost never changes for 25 years, it costs the city more money to compute originally than never to change it. Will it ever change if I add impervious surface? Mr. Koshak said if you added a large building, fee would be calculated at time of bldg. permit. CM Black said we won't be computing. First there has to be a project. This fee would be applied to routine maintenance. That figure would be calculated every year, based on basis of a one acre parcel and adjustments off of that. There are two changes that could be impacted, when a person changes the use of property, or amount of operation and maintenance budget on an annual basis. Mr. Niebling asked if properties are looked at once year. CM Black said no unless there is a change. Tim Neilbing then asked that when we get divided up into districts, will the money from my district stay in my district? Mr. MacArthur replied that the Council can decide. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING RE: STORMWATER DRAINAGE Page 7 Mr. Koshak said the Council has the ability to specify it for a taxing district. There will be six taxing districts. If they feel they have additional problems in one district, there might be a larger amount put on that district. CM Black motioned to close the Hearing Establishing a Resolution for surface water Management Impact Fee with the City of Otsego. Seconded by CM Fournier. All in favor. Motion carried. Discussion: CM Heidner asked if someone with 40 acres, with nothing on it, will pay nothing. Mr. Koshak said if the council decides that. The largest parcel we consider is 40 acres. Most farmsteads are one 40 acre parcel, no intention of policy to charge crop land. CM Fournier said that in order to help understand this, just how valuable are these resolution and amendments for Otsego to deal with storm water? Mr. MacArthur said they set up the legal frame work. CM Fournier said that without them, we can do nothing, it comes out of general fund or assess. 5. Any other Council Business: Mr. MacArthur brought up the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Amendments were tabled at the Planning Commission Meeting. CM Black motioned to have the proposed amendments and Resolutions at the March 27, 1995 City Council meeting. Seconded by CM Fournier. All in favor. Motion carried. 1. Proposed Amendment to City of Otsego Ordinance 24-1 Regarding Storm Water. 2. Resolution Establishing City Policy for Collection of a Fee for Storm Water Impact upon Subdivision or Increase of Impervious Surface of property Within the City, and Establishing City Policy for Responsibility For Construction of Drainage Improvements Within New Subdivisions. 3. Amendment to City of Otsego Ordinance 12-1 Establishing Municipal Utilities, Rules and Regulations Regarding Utilities, Rates and Charges and Collection of Utility Payments. 4. Resolution Establishing a Surface Water Management Impact Fee Within the City of Otsego. a. Consider memo from David Licht, NAC dated March 8, 1995 re: Otsego - Sewer Area Planning Elaine Beatty said the Council should review this. SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING RE: STORMWATER DRAINAGE Page 8 CM Black: Item Cl. The answer is NO. The subcommittee from the three areas have determined what the qualifications are. There is no reason for RFQ. The request for RFP were requested. The message from the other two communities is why we haven't gotten this done. RE: II. CM Black said we discussed this at the last meeting, and that should be sufficient information. If there needs to be further clarification, that should come back from Engineer Firms we have contacted. CM Black asked if the staff is looking for guidance on other items? Elaine Beatty said yes, the reason is are you agreeing with the memo? CM Black stated that we have already indicated to move ahead and look at the Comphrensive Plan. CM Fournier agreed, but some of it might be a little premature. Mayor Freske asked Elaine to put this item on the March 27, 1995 Council agenda. 6. Adjourn Mayor Freske thanked everyone for attending. CM Heidner motioned to adjourn. CM Black seconded. All in favor. Motion carried. Adjourned at 8:30 PM. P.1 MAR 24 '95 13:57 H Ki1NISON ANDERSON n STORM WATER POLICY STANDARD UNIT MEASUREMENT OF RUNOFF The proposed standard Residential Equivalency Parcel (REP) is defined as a one acre parcel with not more than 7.5% of the area being impervious or semi -impervious surfacing. Every lot or parcel of record in the City of Otsego is assigned a minimum value of 1.0 REP. Lots or parcels larger than the standard 1.0 acre lots or parcels have allowance for impervious area, as shown on the following table, not greater than 1.5% of the total area. mwe fQr JXT vi .0 o. Equiv. Cl .`. Maxilla= , . i s AyeAllr� n_ce Parc l size. 1.0 Ac. or less 1.0 Ac. to 2.0 Ac. 2.0 Ac. to 5.0 Ac. 5.0 Ac. to 40.0 Ac. 3,267 SF max. impervious area 4.0% of parcel area, not less than 3 ,67 SF o 2.0 !o of parcel area, not less than 3484 SF 1.5% of parcel area, not less than 4356 SF impervious surfaces are defined as man=made surfaces that either totally or partially block water infiltration through the surface. Concrete, asphalt, brick, tilt along with compact gravel and earth and other hard surfaces are examples of impervious and semi -impervious surfaces to be in-cludec in the calculation of the REP. R.2 NAR 24 '95 1St 57 HA AN ON ANDERSON Attachment to Drainage Policy Letter Prepared by John A. Harwood on 12/20/94 icies be We have recommend that the City °f Otsego � standarainage dized elcl one acre lot o+nparcel. rm drainage runoff equivalency developed from a 1, An "allowance" for impervious area is defined at 7.5% of the area of a one acre lot which allowance is 3267 square feet. Impervious area review must consider all human made surfacing that in part or total blocks infiltration of water. Impervious area is defined as the area of all buildings measured at the foundation plus the area of all asphalt, concrete, brick orlike surfaces. The standardized allowance provides for the following impervious areas, Dwelling Garage Accessory Building Driveway Misc, Area Total 1,600 SF 660 SF 190 SF 817 SF 31 SF 3,267 SF (nominal 36 x 44) (nominal 22 x 30) (nominal 12 x 16) (nominal 16 x 51) Parcels different in size from the standardized 1.0 acre lot have impervious allowance as shown on the following table, arc l .siz , 12,500 SF 0.5 Ar.. 1.0 Ac. 1.0 Ac. to 2,0 Ac. 2.0 Ac. to 5.0 Ac. 5.0 Ac. to 10.0 Ac. 10.0 Ac. to 20.0 Ac, 20.0 Ac. to 40.0 Ac. 1.010.19,„r„ .1 Allowable Impervious n,rni P rvious Area Urban lot Small lot Std. Lot 3,267 to 3,484 SF 3,484 to 4,366 SF 4,356 to 6,534 SF 6,534 to 13,068 SF 13,068 to 26,136 SF 3267 SF max 3267 SF max 3267 SF max impervious on Seu' P r'ous 27.2% 15.0% 7.5% 4% maximum 2% maximum 1.5% maximum 1,5% maximum 1.5% maximum Parcels with total area greater than 1.0 acres are allowed additional impervious area for typical longer driveways and larger accessory buildings. Parcels with total area greater than 5.0 acres are allowed additional impervious area, typical of more agricultural uses, to a maximum of 1.5% of the total parcel area, An properties used for a single residential unit that have total impervious area within the listed parameters are defined as being ane Residential Equivalent Farces (REP). P3 MAR 34 '95 13:58 HAKANSON ANDERSON In addition to an allowance for total impervious area, any parcel that exceeds the basic pervious or semi -previous area allowance is subject to a calculation for impervious equivalency to account for semi -pervious land usage. impervious equivalency shall not exceed 90% of the basic impervious allowance. Semi -permeable land coverage is typified by hard packed earth or gravel surfaces under human usage to include farm yards, feed lots and areas used for driving or parking of vehicles or other like surfaces that would, in their natural state be loose soil, supportiven o� vegetation natural waterrinfiltration. h an usage, have surface conditions not conducive to Semi-impervious surfaces are evaluated according to the following coefficients of runoff. Runoff Coefficient Soil Type or Usage 0.10 Loose sandy soils, naturally vegetated Woodland areas, natural ground contours 0.10 0.150 Loose heavy soils, naturally vegetated 0.15 Agricultural land, row crops 0. S5 Packed sand soils 0.50 Packed heavy soils Earth surfaces used for vehicle driving 0.65 Gravel surfaces, vehicle usage 0.700.70 Building areas, roof drainage to pervious surface Building areas, roof drainage to impervious surface 0.90 0.90 Paved areas, asphalt, concrete or brick 0 90 Drives and walks Example A Residential, 1 acre lot - Standard allowance Dwelling 1600 SF @ 0.80 1,280ESF Garage 660 SF @ 0.90 594 152 Accessory Building 190 SF @ 0.80 152 Driveway 800 SF @ 0.90 2,746 ESF Impervious aquive,lency � � Impervious allowance (90% of 5267) 194SP Difference The standard lot provides for impervious areas at shown with the remaining allowance of 194 Equivalent Square Feet surface at G. Q (ESF) u� suct would h might for example allow for 250 SF of gravel be used for recreational vehicle parking adjaGent to a garage. P.4 MAR 24 '95 13:58 HFIK.HNS lH ANDERSON Example B Residential lot, 1 acre lot (132 x 330) Split level dwelling, large accessory buildings Dwelling inc. garage 1650 SF 1,000 ESF Portion to pervious area 1250 $F @ 0.8 360 Portion to impervious 400 SF @ 0.9 Driveway to residence 640 SF @ 0.40 576 Rear yard accessory bldg. (24 x 32) 768 SF @ 0.8 614 Paved drive to accessory bldg. 1900 SF @ 0.9 1110 Total equivalency 4,260 ESF Impervious allowance (90% of 3267) 2.940 Runoff equivalency 1.45 REP This property has a runoff equivalency of 1.45 Residential Equivalent Parcels due to the presence of p large accessory building and a long paved driveway to the building. Example C Farmstead, 40 acre parcel Dwelling 1600 SF @ 0.80 1,280 ESE Garage 660 SF @ 0.80 528 Accessory buildings 4,000 SF @.0.80 3,200 Farmyard area, packed earth 20,000 SF @ 0.50 10,000 Gravel drive 16 ft. x 600 ft. 9600 ft. @ 0.70 25 ESF Impervious equivalent 21,728 Impervious allowance 1.5% at .90 23,522 1,794 S>= Remaining allowance, difference: This parcel qualifies for 1.0 residential equivalency. The total of impervious or semi -pervious area is 35,860 SF, Which exceeds the 1.5% allowance of 26,136 SF. However, much of the area is semi - pervious packed earth at a 0.5 runoff coefficient. than the e total cal90culated Equivalent Square Foot (ESE) area of 21,728 is less impervious allowance of 23,522. There is in this example "room` under the allowance for almost 3,500 ESE of additional packed earth usage without exceeding the equivalency allowance. CITY OF OTSEGO COUNTY OF WRIGHT STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CITY POLICY FOR COLLECTION OF A OF IMPERVIOUSEFOR STORM WATER IMPACT UPON SIIBDIVI8ION ESTABLISHING CITY POLICY SURFACE OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY, AND FOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN NEW SUBDIVISIONS. WHEREAS, the City of Otsego has directed the City engineer to undertake a Storm Water Drainage Report for the City; nd WHEREAS, the City Engineer hascompleted presented to the Coun and 1 for repto ort, dated February, 1994, has been their review, and a public hearing was draft of held onsaid anuary 13, report 1to5a11 present the results of a preliminary el minar interested members of the public; and ive WHEREAS, said report indicates that divides the City sintodseveral inage problems throughout the City, distinct watersheds; and WHEREAS, the report recommends that specific funding mechanisms be be established to constructeasements, repairage and improvements, , existing necessary drainagee na draig facilities, and insure that those adding to the potentialnae problems pay a fair and equitable share of the exp attributable to their activities; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has specifically recommended thattha system be established wherein those persons increasing e impervious surface area of their property be assessed a specified approval for such at the time that City app increased imperviousitably surface area is obtained, said fee to orvio slyurface aand ges ably represent the affect of such increased imp the City storm water system; and that the WHEREAS, the City Engineer has regarding her rethem responsibility ty Cfor ity establish a specific policy construction of nenessary drainage improvements when land is subdivided within the City, or in cases where drainage improvements are a necessary or required condition of granting a minor a conditional use permit, a Planned Unit Development, in any other case where changes es in the land will affect drainage or ct to and are subj�eCity review; and Engineer has recommended a policy wherein the WHEREAS, the City licant for any City reviewed land Developer, Property Owner or App use change would be responsible for construction of all necessary draimprovements as required by the City within the subdivision imP subject property; and would also be responsible subdivision or the for a separate fee, said fee to be based upon engineering studies orts establishing the affect of the proposed la and feasibility rep on citydrainage, for the impact of the land use change improvements and increased impervious surface area on the City's overall storm water system; and WHEREAS, the City needs to acquireal try imeaof reviewge nof to effectuate a city wide drainage system any proposed land change which will affect drainage. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Otsego, Minnesota: 1. That it is the policy of the City of Otsego that prior to approval of any minor subdivision, plat, conditional use permit, planned unit development, or other land use change (hereinafter revvieiewwed referred to as "land use change") which will be reedvbbyyy the city which requires drainage improvements that: to A. A determination be made by the City Engineerhasptopohat at drainage improvements are necessary witland use change. owner, or applicant (hereinafter B. That the Developer, property ,. collectively referred to as applicant") provide proper plans setting forth the location, capacity and other necessary information regarding said drainage improvements. C. That the Applicant enter into an agreement with the City, to approval, in which the Appagrees as a condition of construct the aforementioned drainage improvements to thealoeg satisfaction of the City and furhrr grsatoapost, of with other necessary financial guarantees, security sufficient to insure proper acceptablelto theof SCity• improvements upon terms and inform D.That, as a condition of approval of said land use change, that the Applicant dedicate to the Citytall nll ecessaryuse drainage easements rasated to the determined bytheCity. change on drainage, • 2. That it is the policy olic of the City of Otsego that prior to approving any land use change, lot split, or building permit, the of which is for the purpose of construction which a will affect drainage within the City,granting the City will require, s a that the property owner pay to the City a condition of approval, reports, fee, as established by engineering studies or feasibility rept s, to cover the impact of additional storm water from said property on the city system. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Otsego this day of , 1995. IN FAVOR: OPPOSED: Norman F. Freske, Mayor Elaine Beatty, City Clerk MAR -08-1'99 13:23 NOTE: 612 595 983? [ARC P . 01..• 02 Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. URBAN P L A N N I N G • D E S I G N • MA R K E T RESEARCH This information will be added on the Agenda of Special Council of 3/20/95 for Council Considerations. G MEMORANDUM TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council FROM: David Licht DATE: 8 March 1995 RE: Otsego -Sewer Area Planning FILE NO: 176.08-95.02 • 10.0 aMMIWIIMMO ENGINEER _____. DATE Based upon the City Council workshop on 2 March, there are evidently a number of activities which the City needs to pursue as part of the preparation for a sewer feasibility study in association with Dayton and Frankfort.. So as to insure everyone is aware of these tasks, our office, in consultation with the City Clerk, City Engineer and City Attorney, has outlined the work below. We have also attempted to identify a time schedule to assist the Council in the programming of activities. I. Preparation of Request for Qualifications (RFQ) and/or Request for Proposals (RFP) A. Responsibility: Ron Black, Elaine Beatty, NAC, City Attorney B. C. Considerations: 1. Does the RFQ/RFP need to be reviewed by other participating communities? Completion Date: 24 March 1995 2, Has the list of times to be contacted been finalized'? 5775 Wayzata Blvd. - Suite 555 • St. Louis P3i k, MN V .J 2) 595-3636'7:u. 595 612 '795 9837 P.02 02 14WP-08-1995 1::=4 II. Service Area Boundaries Determination/Land Use Concepts A. Technical Review and Recommendation 1. Responsibility: NAC, H&A, Elaine Beatty 2. Completion Date: 24 March 1995 B. Policy Maker Review and Determination 1. Advisory Body Consideration a. Planning Commission - April 1995 b. EDAAC - April 1995 2. City Council - April 1995 C. Considerations: 1. Most of the land use has been addressed by the existing Comprehensive Plan. 2. The amount of various land uses, general absorption rates, and phasing needs to be addressed. 111. Other Matters A. Clarification from the City of Dayton on the service area to be included based upon Metropolitan Council review. (This will be an extremely sensitive matter which must be approached cautiously.) B. City newsletter article on sewer feasibility program (so as to avoid confusion and misunderstanding on the part of City residents, an effort should be made to communicate the activities which are being pursued and the implications of the effort. Before the staff embarks on the work -which is involved, the acceptability of such efforts should be determined by the City Council, pc: Elaine Beatty Andrew MacArthur Larry Koshak 2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CITY OF OTSEGO ORDINANCE 24-1 REGARDING STORM WATER An ordinance relating to local improvements and special assessments and establishing a general policy therefore. Delete existing Section 24-1-3c storm sewers which section reads as follows: C. Storm Sewers. Cost for construction obhe seweron thbas s of the sty tsewers shall e against the property in the area served area to be assessed shall be square footage of the propertY. The determined on the basis of topographic maps and other pertinent data. 1. Within new developments, the total cost of constructing storm sewer improvements shall be a part ofrAgreement. Letter of Credit or other security provided through the Developers g Add new section 24-1-3C, storm sewers as follows: C. Storm Sewers. Cost for construction of storm sew ers r on thll be assessed e basis of the against the property in the area served by Prna___. ivalen1 square footage of the property• The other pertinentsed The. be determined on the basis of topographic maps•r•_n I • . - f•• ..- fir •r•.- - h.11 - • -rm'n- i•n 1) As a general policy, all properties are responsible for a proportionate and equitable share of the costs of storm sewer and surface water system components. a) All individual properties or aggregation of properties within a drainage area, project area, development area or other defined area are responsible for the total costs to construct storm sewer improvements that serve the area to include lateral facilities which are the surface water and storm sewer drainage pipes, ditches and appurtenances that provide service to smaller or local areas and trunk facilities. Lateral facilities can consist of portions of trunk facilities with the basic system costs allocated to lateral service and the portion of system cost associated with oversizing and/or added depth as required for area service allocated to the trunk system. b) All individual properties or aggregation or properties within a drainage area, project area, development area or other defined area are responsible for providing ponding to reduce peak runoff rates from developed property to the rates from property in its natural state and to enhance surface water quality. c) All properties are responsible for an equitable proportion of the costs of trunk storm sewer facilities which are the larger surface or storm water drainage pipes, ditches and appurtenances that provides service to an entire area. All properties are responsible for an equitable proportion of the on-going costs of storm sewer utility system operation, maintenance, repair and replacement as required for proper drainage system function. d) 2) Costs and charges for construction, operation and maintenance of the surface water and storm sewer management and control system will be allocated, assessed or paid under statutory authority including the municipal authority for zoning and subdivision control, the municipal authority to charge for the use and availability of storm sewer facilities, the municipal authority to establish storm sewer tax districts, the municipal authority to establish a storm sewer utility and the municipal authority to construct and assess the costs of public improvements as a benefit to properties. Under this authority, surface water management and storm sewer systems costs will be allocated, assessed and paid as follows: a) For all land use changes made under City zoning and subdivision approval authority, properties will be responsible, at the time of land use change approval, for total costs of construction of required storm sewer improvements, for costs of providing required ponding and for proportionate costs of the trunk drainage system. b) To pay for the construction, reconstruction, repair, enlargement, improvement, or obtainment of storm sewer systems, including mains, holding areas and ponds, and other appurtenances and related facilities for the collection and disposal of storm water, the city shall impose just and equitable charges for the use and availability of the facilities. Charges to individual properties shall be as nearly as possible proportionate to the cost of furnishing the service, or shall be just and equitable. AH charges shall be based upon established statutory procedures, city ordinances, resolutions or by reference to procedures and rules established by the City Council pursuant to statute, ordinance or resolution. Said rules shall set forth the classification of properties based upon the quantity and quality of storm water produced, and other relevant factors. Such charges shall be imposed to all eligible properties in a project area at the time when facilities are constructed for the use and availability of properties and shall include the costs of storm sewer improvements, required ponding and trunk drainage. c) All properties shall be responsible for a periodic fee, charge or tax for on-going and continued operation, maintenance and repair of storm sewer facilities with such fee, charge or tax ,established by municipal authority as a storm sewer taxing district and/or under municipal authority for a storm sewer utility. %� AMENDMENT TO CITY OF OTSEGO ORDINANCE 12-1 ESTABLISHING MUNICIPAL UTILITIES, RULES AND REGULATIONS RE- GARDING UTILITIES, RATES AND CHARGES AND COLLECTION OF UTILITY PAYMENTS The City Council of the City of Otsego ordains the following: SECTION 1. Otsego Ordinance No. 12-1 is amended to read as follows: Delete existing Section 12-1-1 which reads as follows: Section 1. 12-1-1: Purpose and Establishment of Utilities: There is hereby established a Utilities Department. The water and sewer systems as they are now constituted or shall be hereafter enlarged or extended shall be operated and maintained under the provisions of this Chapter subject to the authority of the City Council at any time to amend, alter, change and repeal the same. The City Clerk shall have charge and management of the water and sewer systems subject to the direction of the City Council. The City Clerk may designate other City employees to carry out duties and responsibilities under this Chapter. Add new section 12-1-1, as follows: Section 1. 12-1-1: Purpose and Establishment of Utilities: There is hereby established a Utilities Department. The water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer and drainage systems as they are now constituted or shall be hereafter enlarged or extended shall be operated and maintained under the provisions of this Chapter subject to the authority of the City Council at any time to amend, alter, change and repeal the same. The City Clerk shall have charge and management of the water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer and drainage systems subject to the direction of the City Council. The City Clerk may designate other City employees to carry out duties and responsibilities under this Chapter. Delete section 12-1-2, 2 which reads as follows: 2. "Municipal Utility" means any City owned utility system, including, but not by way of limitation, water and sewer service. Add new section 12-1-2, 2, as follows: 2. "Municipal Utility" means any City owned utility system, including, but not by way of limitation, water service, sanitary sewer service, and storm water sewer and/or drainage service. Delete section 12-1-3 which reads as follows: It e 12-1-3: Mandatory Connection To Public Systems: private shall be unlawful for any person to install or hook up to a system which is intended to provide water for human consumption or to install or hook up to a private sewer system in the City, except in cases where the public water installation oror sewer stems arnot hook upe The CitysClerk sible to the premises requesting questions of accessibility shall refer to the City Engineer all q y public which may arise. The City Engineer shall determine if the water or sewer systems are accessible to the premises requesting installation or hook up. Add new section 12-1-3 as follows: 12-1-3: Mandatory Connection inst 11 oPublic r hookSystems: a private lwater l be unlawful for any person system which is intended to provide water for human consumption, install or hook up to a private sanitary sewer system, or to hook up to private storm water sewer and /or drainage system in the City, except in cases where the public water, sanitary sewer, or storm water sewer and/or tallation orstems are not accessile hook up.The City Clerktshall o the premises requesting in refer to the City Engineer all questions of accessibility which may arise. The City Engineer shall determine if the public water, sanitary sewer, or storm water sewer and/or drainage systems are accessible to the premises requesting installation or hook up. Delete section 12-1-4 which reads as follows: 12-1-4: Fixing Rates and Charges For Municipal Utilities.but not by carates es and charges for municipal utilities, including, limitation,'rates for service, permit fees, deposit, hook up, meter testing fees, disconnection fees, reconnection fees, and penalty fees for delinquency, shall be fixed, determined and amended by the Council and adopted by resolution. Such resolution, containing effective date thereof, shall be kept on file and open to public inspection in the office of the City Clerk and shall be uniformly enforced. For the purpose of fixing such rates and charges, th Council may categorize and classify under the various types of service, provided that such categorization and classification shall be included in the resolution authorized by this Section. Add new section 12-1-4 as follows: 12-1-4: Fixing Rates and Charges For Municipal Utilities. All rates and charges for municipalutilities, rates including, contr contribution to way the system, p rates for deposit, hook up, meter testing fees, system, permit fees, P � disconnection fees, reconnection fees, and penalty fees for delinquency, shall be fixed, determined and amended by the Council and adopted by resolution. Such resolution, containing the effective date thereof, shall be kept on file and of the City Clerk and shall e unifoen to rmly lic inspection in the office enforced. For the purpose of fixing rates and charges, the Council may categorize and classify under various types of services, or by contribution to the system, provided that such categorization and classification is just and equitable and is included in the resolution authorized by this Section. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance Amendment shall be effective from and after its passage and publication according to law. ADOPTED this day of March, 1995 by the Otsego City Council. IN FAVOR: OPPOSED: CITY OF OTSEGO Norman F. Freske, Mayor Elaine Beatty, City Clerk CITY OF OTSEGO COUNTY OF WRIGHT STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT IMPACT FEE WITHIN THE CITY OF OTSEGO. WHEREAS, the City of Otsego has directed the City Engineer to undertake a Storm Water Drainage Report for the City; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has completed such a report, the preliminary draft, dated December, 1994, has been presented to the Council for their review, and a public hearing was held on January 13, 1995 to present the results of said report to all interested members of the public; and WHEREAS, said report indicates that there are extensive drainage problems throughout the City, and divides the City into several distinct watersheds; and WHEREAS, the report recommends that specific funding mechanisms be established to construct needed drainage improvements, repair and maintain existing facilities, and insure that those adding to potential drainage problems pay a fair and equitable share of the expenses attributable to their activities; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has specifically recommended that a fee system be established throughout the City to pay for ongoing operation and maintenance of drainage improvements, such system being sousbased of surfacenareal on lea h e rindiv dual ula 1property the to amount uon within the impervious City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such a fee would most fairly be implemented as a yearly charge against properties within the City based upon a fair and equitable formula proposed by the City Engineer, and which will be approved as to specific fee amounts by further resolution of the City Council, after public hearing. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Otsego, Minnesota: 1. That there is hereby established a fee for every lot within the City which contributes to City drainage problems due to the impervious surface area of the property owners lot or lots. 2. That said fee is established upon the City Engineer's determinatiotY of a Standard Residential Equivalency Parcel (REP) and multiples of the same. 3. That the annual fee for properties within the City shall be established on a per REP basis as established by further resolution of the City Council, after public hearing. The determination of the number of REPs for each property owner shall be calculated by application of the formulas set forth by the City Engineer and approved by the City. The amount of the fee per REP may be amended on a yearly basis by further resolution of the City Council. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Otsego this day of , 1995. IN FAVOR: OPPOSED: Norman F. Freske, Mayor Elaine Beatty, City Clerk