6. SR 10-30-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

East Elk River Trunk Sewer Page 4 October 30, 1995 depends upon a legal opinion on assessment methods and whether or not the city can or should assess properties for trunk sewer and water at different rates based on zoning. (Another Springsted analysis based on the Patchin report and showing $5,200 per acre assessments for all properties in Phase I will be available on Monday. This analysis is anticipated to also show the need for some tax levies to meet our bond payments.) The second appraisal from Patchin and Associates analyzing the benefit of trunk sewer and water in east Elk River is enclosed for your review. The commercial and industrial figures from Patchin and Associates are different from the numbers in the St. Cloud Appraisal. I don't think that we will be able to get a joint report from both firms, but we should be able to get an addendum to the report from each firm. Hopefully, the addendum will show the numbers being closer together, especially in the industrial benefit area. If this is the case, these numbers will make it easier to have the city undertake this project with less concern about: meeting bond obligations; having a large amount of holding expenses; and having city wide tax levies for this project. The city has said in recent years that it is not an issue of if the city is going east with sewer and water, but it is an issue of when. The question can logically be raised that if we do not go east with sewer and water in 1996-97, when will this project happen? The answer to that question is that the city will go east with sewer and water when it is petitioned for by major property owners (i.e. Schultz, Hohlen, Powell, etc.). This assumes that the city does not push the utilities out east in order to have industrial land available. This petition could be for a school, commercial development, one or two "big box" commercial projects, or something on that order. When this project is petitioned for, the development "drags" the utilities out to the east, and while the developer does not pay 100 percent of the cost of the utilities, the development will pay closer to the actual cost for the project than what is currently being debated for assessment rates. Regarding the workshop goals and outline, it should be noted that I do not believe we will have sufficient time to talk about Item #8 -the City development policy and ordinance. This item is on the outline based on a request from the Mayor to have a list of "pros and cons" developed regarding our current city development policy and ordinance. This request followed the denial by the City Council of the Denny Chuba request for development around Waco Avenue. This topic does need to be discussed in the future and • the City Council will need to make a decision about changing or not changing