Loading...
05-14-2002 City Council Study Session PacketCity of Grand Island Tuesday, May 14, 2002 Study Session Packet City Council:Mayor: Ken Gnadt City Administrator: Marlan Ferguson City Clerk: RaNae Edwards T u 7:00:00 PM Council Chambers - City Hall 100 East First Street Joyce Haase Margaret Hornady Gale Larson Glen Murray Jackie Pielstick Larry Seifert Robert Sorensen Scott Walker Tom Ward Fred Whitesides City of Grand Island City Council Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call A - SUBMITTAL OF REQUESTS FOR FUTURE ITEMS Individuals who have appropriate items for City Council consideration should complete the Request for Future Agenda Items form located at the Information Booth. If the issue can be handled administratively without Council action, notification will be provided. If the item is scheduled for a meeting or study session, notification of the date will be given. B - RESERVE TIME TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS This is an opportunity for individuals wishing to provide input on any of tonight's agenda items to reserve time to speak. Please come forward, state your name and address, and the Agenda topic on which you will be speaking. City of Grand Island City Council Item -1 Sidewalk Committee Report In 1997 the City Council adopted a Resolution (attached) for the continued installation of public sidewalks. The policy requires a plan to accommodate pedestrian school traffic. A committee consisting of staff from the Public Works, Building and Planning Departments has been meeting to develop priorities for sidewalks near schools. In April 2002, the committee met with the Principals of Stolley Park, Seedling Mile, Westridge and Engleman schools to discuss their thoughts regarding sidewalks. At Seedling Mile School, two representatives from the Seedling Mile Parent Teachers Organization also attended the meeting. The Committee would like direction from the Council in order to proceed. If Council resolves to pursue sidewalks in these areas, property owners will be notified to install sidewalks and be given a deadline for compliance. A Resolution directing staff to notify property owners to install sidewalks will be on the May 21, 2002 Council Agenda. Tuesday, May 14, 2002 Study Session City of Grand Island Staff Contact: Steve Riehle, City Engineer/Public Works Director City of Grand Island City Council Sidewalk Committee Report Grand Island City Council Study Session May 14, 2002 The installation of sidewalks on both sides of the street (in most cases) is recommended for the following locations: I. Stolley Park School William Street from Grand Avenue to Stolley Park Road Grand Avenue east from Riverview Drive to the existing sidewalk east of August Street Riverview Drive south of Grand Avenue A number of students that live west of Stolley Park School walk to the school property from Pioneer Boulevard through the City’s Parkview Well Pump No. 1 property, a utility easement, and enter the school property though an opening in the fence. Sidewalk could be constructed on the City wellfield property. A sidewalk easement would be required across 2 lots to connect the wellfield property to the school property. II. Seedling Mile School Seedling Mile Road from Lueth Drive to the City limits on the north side Seedling Mile Road from Lueth Drive to Shady Bend Road on the south side Installation of sidewalks in a portion of this area will require grading and culvert work by the Public Works Department before the sidewalks can be installed. The grading will be needed on the north side of Seedling Mile Road east of Shady Bend Road and the south side of Seedling Mile Road west of Shady Bend Road. III. Westridge Middle School Staff recommends that the sidewalks be part of the solution with the transportation issues surrounding the extension of Independence Avenue. IV. Engleman Elementary School Gateway Avenue from Sherwood Road to Capital Avenue Marian Road from the School north to Blauvelt Road on the west side Blauvelt Road from Marian Road to Northwest Avenue on the south side Northwest Avenue from Capital Avenue to Utah Avenue on the east side Northwest Avenue from Capital Avenue to the City limits north of Saddle Horse Court on the west side Installation of sidewalks along Northwest Avenue will require grading and culvert work to be performed by the Public Works Department before sidewalks can be installed. Item -2 Update on Annexation BACKGROUND ON ANNEXATION PROCESS Annexation has been a subject of discussion many times over the past several years and was one of the top Council priorities identified at the 2001-2002 Annual Council Retreat. When Council directed Administration to look at annexation, the emphasis was on addressing infrastructure needs, equalizing tax situations for those who are currently receiving City services, and acknowledging current and anticipated growth of the community in order to best plan for service delivery. Nebraska law provides the authority for municipalities to annex land. The annexation of urban areas adjacent to existing city boundaries can be driven by many factors. The following are reasons annexation should be considered: a. Governing urban areas with the statutorily created urban form of government, municipalities have historically been charged with meeting the needs of the expanded community. b. Provide municipal services. Municipalities are created to provide the governmental services essential for sound urban development and for the protection of health, safety and well being of residents in areas that are used primarily for residential, industrial, and commercial purposes. c. Ensure orderly growth pursuant to land use, building, street, sidewalk, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water, and electrical services. d. Provide more equitable taxation to existing property owners for the urban services and facilities that non-city residents in proposed annexation areas use on a regular basis such as parks, streets, public infrastructure, emergency services, retail businesses and associated support. e. Ensure ability to impose and consistently enforce planning processes and policies. f. Address housing standards and code compliance to positively impact quality of life for residents. g. Enable residents of urban areas adjacent to city to participate in municipal issues, including elections that either do or will have an impact on their properties. Tuesday, May 14, 2002 Study Session City of Grand Island City of Grand Island City Council h. Anticipate and allocate resources for infrastructure improvements. Specifically, changes in October, 1999 to Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality Regulation Title 124 concerning on site waste water treatment systems impacts new and replacement private septic systems. i. Assist in population growth to enable community to reach Community Development Block Grant entitlement status – 50,000. Entitlement communities automatically receive Community Development block grant dollars; no competitive process required. j. Provide long term visioning abilities as it relates to growth and provision of services. Annexations are, oftentimes, challenging issues for communities. Unlike many actions taken by City government, residents who are directly affected may have strong opinions about the personal impact annexation will have on them. As this Council is well aware, the 1984 annexation of the Capital Heights area has impacted city government for the past 18 years. In fact, residual feelings and concerns from the annexation of Parkview in the early 1970s still exist. One of the challenges associated with annexation involves timing. The impact to most residents is not neutral. Those property owners who are experiencing infrastructure problems (sewer or water) now will exhibit a different level of support than those who are not having problems and will not see an immediate benefit in sewer or water services. Those affected have legitimate questions, concerns, and reactions. City officials must recognize these responses yet remain focused on the overall big picture. Because of the complexity of annexation issues and the associated questions, the City Administration suggested an opportunity be provided whereby residents could informally seek and receive general information regarding annexation and specific information regarding their property. While the proposed annexation timetable allows several opportunities for citizen comment at OFFICIAL meetings, many people may feel more comfortable talking in an informal setting. The open houses provided an excellent opportunity for one on one interaction allowing property owners, as well as City staff and officials to discuss concerns and issues. Flyers notifying the property owners were mailed to each address. Attendance was good. The meetings were, in my opinion, very successful. Meeting at Cedar Hollow - 67 people attended Meeting at Seedling Mile on Saturday morning - 63 people attended Meeting at Seedling Mile on Wednesday evening - 44 people attended ISSUES RAISED AT OPEN HOUSES 1. City just wants more property taxes. While the receipt of additional property taxes is certainly a response to annexation, a cursory City of Grand Island City Council review of the additional property taxes shows no direct relationship between the amount of investment in the public systems (water/sewer) needed to make necessary infrastructure improvements in some of the proposed annexation areas and the revenue generated. (See Attached Chart) 2. We take care of our own. This thought/philosophy may have been effective for many years during the life of this development; however, as systems age and regulations change, this may no longer be true. It is a given that at some time these areas (specifically the East Lakes Area) will need to revamp their current infrastructure. Annexation allows the City to position itself from a financial perspective and priority perspective in order to be prepared to meet these needs when the issue becomes urgent. To wait puts the neighborhood, property owners, and the City, in the position of not being prepared to make the necessary improvements to insure these residents have continuous services. If an area is not in the City limits, districts can not be created until the area becomes part of the City. It is best that this not happen during a time of crisis but rather through a planned process. 3. We wanted to live in this school district; in the country. School choice is a very personal issue. The City recognizes and acknowledges this. State Statutes do not allow areas within 5 miles of incorporated cities to incorporate as a stand-alone city. This regulation was adopted knowing that municipalities can and would be expanding their boundaries as growth occurs. Some residents in the proposed annexation areas have stated they do not consider themselves "part of the City." Yet, many of these folks are currently working in Grand Island, traveling City streets, using City services such as the Library, parks, electricity, etc. They enjoy the benefits of the City without the responsibilities, either civic or financial. In addition, their property value is directly related to its proximity to the City of Grand Island. Relocating the houses around the Lakes or in Schroeder Subdivision to 20 miles outside of Grand Island would affect the value of those properties. While property owners may have become property owners when the neighborhood was "out in the country", it is reasonable to expect that at some point these residential areas would be brought into City limits. 4. Annexation at some time in the future is OK; just don’t do it now - what’s the hurry? Now is the appropriate time from a planning and preparation standpoint. There is enough of a concern about infrastructure to consider these annexations. City officials have a responsibility to consider the big picture and an obligation to look at the outlying areas and determine the impact those areas have on the City. Elected and appointed officials must be able to envision how a City will grow and how this growth should be managed so as to protect the integrity of the entire community. We recognize that residents may not have this overall perspective and may be driven by a more limited perspective - how does the annexation affect me? City of Grand Island City Council 5. I pay additional City taxes but get no sewer and water unless a neighborhood district is created and I connect to the system. The costs for me to connect could be $10,000 or more. Do I have to connect? The subdivisions that currently do not have City sewer or water were developed without provisions for these centralized services. The cost of providing sewer and water was deferred to the property owners by the developer of these subdivisions. Subdivisions being developed today are required to provide connections to City sewer and water. The City provides water/sewer trunk lines to areas within corporate limits. From here, the decision to build neighborhood systems is the decision of the property owners in that specific area. If the property owners determine a need for connection and recognize the overall benefit to the area, a sanitary sewer and/or water district can be created by Council. If 50% or more of the property owners in the area support the district, the City will construct the infrastructure and begin making the services available. Property owners can connect to the system when their private systems are no longer operable and need extensive repair or replacement. Connection fees will be determined based on district boundaries and costs. The City will assess the costs at an interest rate of 7% for a period of 5-10 years. The first payment is typically due about one year after construction is completed. 6. What City services will I get upon annexation? As outlined in the City’s annexation plan for service delivery, city services provided with annexation include police, fire, streets, code enforcement and others. SUMMARY These informal open houses may not have convinced some folks that annexation was the right thing to do. They were not intended to do so. The intent of the open houses was to exchange information and answer questions. Staff did their best to answer the questions with factual information while neither advocating nor opposing annexation. The proposed timetable (attached) has the Council referring the issue of annexation to the Regional Planning Commission at next week’s meeting (May 21, 2002). Please note, there are 6 opportunities for public comment and testimony through the process. May 21, 2002 City Council Referral to Regional Plannin June 5, 2002 Regional Planning Commission Meetin June 11, 2002 Resolution Setting Public Hearin June 25, 2002 Public Hearing and First Reading of the Ordinanc July 9, 2002 Second Reading of the Ordinance July 23, 2002 Third and Final Reading of the Ordinance The reasons for this timetable include: ______ Impending infrastructure issues ______ Process needs to be structured and timely City of Grand Island City Council ______ Council’s discussions last two years at Retreat ______ Issue that shouldn’t be left unresolved The question for Council is a philosophical one more than a financial one. Is the proposed annexation an overall benefit to the community and the residents, even over objections of some of those that will be affected? To assist the Council with first-hand knowledge of how the informal open house meetings were structured, we have set up tonight’s meeting in much the same way as the three open houses were structured. Staff Contact: Marlan Ferguson City of Grand Island City Council 5/10/2002 [Time] CITY ANNEXATION EXPENSES and REVENUE Area Number City Park Infrastructure (Lump Sum) City Electric Infrastructure (Lump Sum) City Water Infrastructure (Lump Sum) City Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure (Lump Sum) Total City Infrastructure (Lump Sum) Property Valuation City Tax (.371648) and CRA Tax (.024721) Net Increase in Property/CRA Taxes per $100,000 Valuation (Note) 2 $0 $0 $0 $565,330 $2,241 $417 3 $0 $0 $0 $26,266 $104 $336 4 $500,000 $2,050,000 $7,500,000 $10,050,000 $44,429,606 $176,105 $336 5b $0 $0 $0 $285,269 $1,131 $336 6 $0 $0 $0 $1,289,217 $5,110 $304 9 $0 $0 $0 $1,628,127 $6,453 $288 10 $300,000 $174,000 $240,000 $714,000 $2,698,553 $10,696 $288 11 $0 $0 $0 $771,427 $3,058 $288 12 $418,830 $0 $0 $418,830 $10,445,478 $41,403 $288 $500,000 $718,830 $2,224,000 $7,740,000 $11,182,830 $62,139,273 $246,301 (Note) Additional City (.3716480) and Community Redevelopment Authority (.024721) levies, less rural fire services charges and changes in school district levies. ANNEXATION TIMELINE April 30, 2002 3/02 9/02 4/02 5/02 6/02 7/02 8/02 City Council Retreat March 4, 2002 15 areas considered for Annexation City Council Study Session April 16 Reviewed inventory of services and facilities, areas, direction from elected officials Open Houses May 2, 4, 8 Cedar Hollow and Seedling Mile Schools City Council Meeting May 21 Refer Annexation to RPC Notice of Public Hearing by RPC May 24 RPC Meeting June 5 to Consider Recommending Annexation City Council Retreat March 10, 2001 Annexation Discussed City Council meeting June 11 Resolution indicating: Considering Annexation Approving Plan Scheduling Public Hearing Public Hearing First Reading of Ordinance June 25 Second Reading of Ordinance July 9 Third Reading of Ordinance July 23 Annexation Ordinance becomes effective no later than August 19 June 11 - July 23 - Plan on File for Public Review