09-30-96 PHCITY OF OTSEGO
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
FOR
ISLAND VIEW ESTATES ADDITIONS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
95-1 AND MISSISSIPPI SHORES IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 95-2
1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th & 7th ADDITIONS
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 - 7 PM
OTSEGO CITY HALL
1. Mayor Norman F_ Freske will call meeting to order.
Mayor Freske called the Public Hearing to order at 7 PM for Island View Estates, Project
95-1 and Mississippi Shores, Project 95-2.
The City Clerk noted the proper notices were posted, published and mailed.
ROLL CALL: Mayor Norman F. Freske, Councilmembers: Suzanne Ackerman, Ron
Black, Larry Fournier, Vern Heidner.
Staff: Andrew MacArthur, City Attorney; Larry Koshak, City Engineer, Kevin Kielb,
Assistant City Engineer; Elaine Beatty, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator; Phyllis Cokley,
Business/Finance Director; Judy Hudson, Deputy Clerk; Carol Olson, Secretary.
2. Turn over to Attorney Andrew MacArthur for the legal aspects of #429
The City Attorney, Andrew MacArthur, explained the procedures for the Hearing, the
legal aspects of State Statute 429, deferment policy, appeal process and prepayment
method.
Mr. MacArthur submitted the Appraisal for Project 95-1 entered into the record.
(Exhibit A)
3_ Turn over to Engineers Larry Koshak and Kevin Kielb for presentation and
explanation.
Mr. Koshak and Mr. Kielb went over the attached estimated worksheets. These
showed the construction costs and their calculated assessments.
4. Turn over to Finance Director Phyllis Cokley for presentation and explanation of
assessments and honding.
Mrs. Cokley prepared various assessment income schedules based on various scenarios
which she explained. (attached)
5_ Questions of City Council_
The Council discussed with Phyllis Cokley the cost difference of the different scenarios
and the impact of prepaids to the different scenarios.
Special Assessment Hearing of September 30, 1996, cont'd. Page 2.
Mayor Freske opened the Hearing for Public Comment.
Mike Skillingstad, 15726 96th Circle.
Mr. Skillingstad questioned what warranted the project, feeling the street was not in need
of repair.
The City Engineer replied that the decision was determined on the age and condition of
the majority of roads. He explained what work is left to be done. The Council also
explained how this type of project will also be done to other streets and the longer you
wait the higher the costs.
Mayor Freske entered into the record the letter from Thor and Leslie Johnson, 15389 95th
Street. The letter stated they are opposed to the proposed assessment.
CM Black motioned to close the Hearing for the Mississippi Shores Improvement
Project 95-2. Seconded by CM Heidner. All in favor. Motion carried.
Lisa Freiberg, 10061 Kahler Avenue.
Ms. Freiberg questioned if the project was completed, who is responsible to pay for that
part not completed.
Kevin Kielb explained what work is left to be completed (restoration of roadside, seeding
mulching, dragging areas smooth). CM Heidner explained the first payment will be due
May 15, 1997, which is included in the tax statement.
Also explained was how the City retains money for any work not completed.
Lori Bestland, 10169 101st Street.
Ms. Bestland complained how poorly the mailboxes were placed and set. Mike Billings,
Field Inspector, informed her that the most significant changes occurred on her lot and she
is concerned with seeding not being done and will have washouts.
Charles Berning, 10101 Kahler Avenue.
Mr. Berning asked about the savings on the project and thought the hill was to be
lowered. He also commented that they were told everything would be returned to normal
- especially with black dirt which he feels he received very poor dirt. Mr. Berning also
asked what are the costs of maintenance for gravel roads, which costs he felt should be
applied to the project. He also stated concern with the depth of the gas lines stating he
could easily hit with a shovel.
Mr. Kielb replied the savings was with the soils and sub -grade work. The hill was lower
by 1.5 feet. He also said the mailbox placement will be checked.
Mr. Koshak explained how they salvaged the black dirt and had to purchase more. They
tried to put 3 to 4 inches down. There is a standard depth (36") for gas lines and permits
Special Assessment Hearing of September 30, 1996, cont'd. Page 3.
for installation of gas lines are issued by the City. Telephone line depth is 18 to 20 inches
and they are also given the right to place in the ROW. He stated the City does not inspect
utility companies work. Mr. Koshak said he will check with the utility companies
regarding this.
CM Heidner said Island View was scheduled for gravel out of a $20,000 General Fund
Budget.
Paula Foley, 10070 Kahler Avenue.
Ms. Foley stated her yard was all dug up and left the rocks there. She also wanted
clarification of due date for the assessment in regards to a Mortgage Company escrows as
of January 1. Ms. Foley questioned if the savings was spread out over both projects, was
it an advantage to them or to the City.
The Council stated it depends on each Mortgage Company's procedure.
Phyllis Cokley explained the savings amounted to $51,000 and allotted equally since the
projects were bided together, constructed together.
Ms. Foley objected since the Island View Project was a bigger project, they should receive
a bigger share of the savings.
Lori Bestland, 10169 101st Street NE.
Complained her gas line was left bare for two months and doubts if they are deep enough.
Ms. Bestland was also concerned starting to pay on the assessment when all the work is
not completed.
The Council explained the project will have a one year warranty bond for material and a
performance bond. Also, money will be withheld for the seeding project.
Sherry Elleraas, 10084 Kahler Avenue NE.
Stated concern for the depth of gas line and telephone line in her yard. She stated this
project should have been voted on by the residents. Ms. Ellerass also objected to the way
the mailboxes were placed, stating they should have been moved back. She also objected
to all of the rocks in her yard.
Mayor Freske explained there was a Public Hearing and the City Council made the final
decision. CM Fournier explained how the residents were asked to call the Council and let
them know what they felt about the project.
Tim Greninger, 10254 99th Street NE.
Stated there has been miscommunication. The City Attorney and Kevin Kielb previously
visited his site and according to Mr. Greninger the way the road was set up the first time it
would have taken his access off from CSAH 39 and that was scraped. 99th Street doesn't
legally touch his property and he has no legal access and therefore there was discussion
about a reduced assessment according to Mr. Greninger.
Mr. MacArthur recalled visiting the site to review the cul-de-sac. According to Mr.
MacArthur it appeared the access to the cul-de-sac is used quite a bit and that Mr.
Greninger might be assessed. Mr. Greninger did state at that time he uses 99th Street
Special Assessment Hearing of September 30, 1996, cont'd. Page 4.
There was further discussion between Mr. Greninger and the Council regarding the usage
of the driveway, access to cul-de-sac and the assessment.
Mayor Freske presented for the record, Exhibit , letter from Mr. and Mrs. Greninger
appealing the assessment.
Sherry Ellerass, 10084 Kahler Avenue NE.
Ms. Ellerass stated concern for the placement of culvert and the trench dug in 30 to 35
feet back to the woods. She stated she resents the assessment.
Mr. Kielb acknowledged there is a berm there and once the site is seeded it will be opened
up.
Tony McAlpine, 10191 Kahler Avenue NE.
Mr. McAlpine felt the contractor did not do a good job on this project, being reckless with
the earth movers, a lot of speeding, driving their equipment on new asphalt leaving
grooves, seeding is not done, new culvert in ditch is 36" and the old one was smaller. He
has asked about having trash guards put on the ends of the culvert for safety reason and
this has not been done. He has a hole in his yard and it keeps getting bigger and is
concerned it might be a sink hole. Concerned with prepayment of assessment and the
project is not done.
Mr. Kielb assured Mr. McAlpine he will get the contractor out there to put the trash
guards on.
Mark Berning, 11800 80th Street NE, part owner of a home on 99th Street.
Stated he warned the Engineer this summer about the washouts and there are still a few
problems with this and stated his disappointed with the estimates at the beginning of the
project.
Mr. Koshak explained when feasibility study was done there was no field work done and
after the design of the project, soil borings determined there was poor soils in the projects.
Lisa Frieberg
Stated she lost about $700 worth of dirt and also asked if by moving the road did it alter
the size of her lot. Ms. Frieberg would also like to see the percentage of gravel which was
to be used for Island View be applied to this project. She also requested for more signage
on the street with concern of all the children in the neighborhood and high speeders.
Mr. Koshak replied she did not lose any property as it stays the same as the ROW was
platted and street was placed on the center line. He also explained how with an asphalt
road that in 5 to 7 years it will have to be sealcoated and in one year there will be
continued crack sealing. The residents aren't assessed for this maintenance.
There was also discussion on how speed limits are set according to the State Rules and
brochures regarding this issue were handed out.
Lori Bestland, 10169 101st Street NE.
Requested that in the future, the City meet with the homeowner to let them know the
degree of construction that will affect their front yard. Her front yard is now 1/3 ditch.
Special Assessment Hearing of September 30,1996, cont'd. Page 5.
Todd Knutson, 10060 Kahler Avenue NE.
Wanted clarification of the $50,000 savings and stated it should go to Island View.
He also voiced disappointment with his driveway - he opted to wait until and project was
done to place concrete in his driveway and by waiting he will have to pay $800 more . He
tried to get a straight answer but couldn't.
Mr. Koshak replied the policy was what a homeowner had before the project (driveway
surface) was returned the same way.
CM Heidner said $35,000 of the savings came from the Mississippi Shores Project and the
assessment proposed splits the savings equally.
Pat Beaumaster, 10121 Kahler Avenue NE
Asked if the final cost has been determined? He feels the City Engineer is saying one
amount and Finance is saying another. He asked what does the City Council traditionally
do for assessments. What does State Statue say about assessing before the project is
complete.
The City Engineer reported the final costs he presented did not include financing and the
Finance Director presented several options.
Mr. MacArthur stated the project won't be finalized untill next spring but assessments can
start before a project is completed. The City is limited to assess for the amount that
benefits the property.
CM Black motioned to closed the Assessment Hearing on the Island
View/Arrowhead Project. Seconded by CM Fournier. All in favor. Motion carried.
8. Adiourn
CM Black motioned to adjourn. Seconded by CM Heidner. All in favor. Motion
carrie .
Adjo Ldat 8:Sf0 PM.0a, 2r j
May �!io an F. Freske
Atte : Elaine Beatty, City lerk/Zoni dministrator
Recorded by: Judy Hudson, Deputy Clerk