Adopt Resolution 15-01-024 Approving Joint Powers Agreement for constructing and maintaining sewer and water serving a portion of the City of Anoka

Purpose:
The purpose of this case it to consider adopting Resolution #15-01-024 approving a Joint Powers Agreement between the Cities of Anoka and Ramsey which defines the agreed upon terms and conditions required to extend Ramsey’s public sanitary sewer and water utilities to serve two parcels within the City of Anoka.
 
Background:
The City of Anoka is requesting that the City of Ramsey extend public sanitary sewer and watermain utilities to serve two parcels in the City of Anoka.  These two parcels, commonly known as 6058 Highway 10, a 0.43 acre parcel with PIN #35-32-25-31-0001, and 6050 Highway 10, a 3.85 acre parcel with PIN #35-32-25-31-0004, are shown in attached Figure 1.  The City of Anoka has determined that it would be more cost-effective to extend City of Ramsey utilities to the parcels through the proposed Ridgepoint residential development than it would be to connect to the nearest City of Anoka utilities north of Highway 10.  This is not only due to proximity, but also due to the increased costs required to bore the utilities under Highway 10.
 
Currently, the City of Ramsey’s nearest available trunk sanitary sewer and watermain stubs are located at the existing cul-de-sac on the east end of Rivlyn Avenue as shown in Figure 1.  Pending additional City approvals, these two trunk utilities will be extended to the east in 2015 to serve the proposed Ridgepoint 7-unit residential development.  Ridgepoint has already received preliminary plat approval from the City, and staff is working with the developer’s engineer to prepare plans for bidding the public improvements, including streets and utilities, for construction in 2015.  Exhibit A of the attached draft Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) shows the proposed public improvements, including streets and utilities.
 
The attached JPA was drafted by the City of Anoka and defines the scope of the proposed utility extensions, including the costs the City of Anoka will be responsible to construct and maintain the proposed utility extensions.  Other applicable conditions, clauses and terms addressed within the draft JPA include provisions for utility service charges, inspections, indemnifications, contingencies, and termination of the agreement.
 
The draft JPA has been reviewed by City of Ramsey staff and the City Attorney.  The blue underlined text within the attached JPA reflects the City Attorney’s comments.  On January 20^th, the Public Works Committee also reviewed the draft JPA, including the City Attorney’s comments, and recommended Council approval of the attached JPA, including the City Attorney’s comments.

Observations:
A similar JPA exists between the City of Anoka and the City of Coon Rapids.  Requests to extend utilities to serve neighboring cities are not uncommon in the twin cities metro area.
 
The City of Anoka wishes to serve the two parcels with utilities to allow for future development.  The properties are currently zoned R-6, Manufactured Home, and are guided for High Density Residential in the Comprehensive Plan.  It is likely that a zoning change would be needed to allow development to occur on the site since the R-6 district generally only permits parks, churches and manufactured home parks.  However, at this time nothing more is known about the future use of the two properties.
 
Alternatives:

Alternative #1 – Motion to adopt Resolution 15-01-024 approving the JPA as drafted.

Alternative #2 – Motion to adopt Resolution 15-01-024 approving the JPA contingent on the following revisions; _______________.

Alternative #3 – Motion to deny adoption of Resolution 15-01-024 at this time.

No funding is required to comply with the City of Anoka’s request, other than the time required by Staff and the City Attorney to review the draft JPA.  Per the attached JPA, the City of Anoka will pay all costs required to construct and maintain the proposed trunk utility extensions based on the locations identified in the JPA, as well as all costs required to develop and record the JPA once approved.

Staff believes the City of Anoka’s request is reasonable and recommends selecting Alternative #1.  Staff would support Alternative #2 if the Council feels that one or more minor modifications are needed to approve the draft JPA.  Staff would not support Alternative #3 unless Council determines there are significant issues with the JPA as drafted that will require substantial revisions before approval can be considered.