My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 06-11-2001
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
CCP 06-11-2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/13/2015 4:20:44 PM
Creation date
8/13/2015 4:05:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
148
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION—MAY 21,2001 <'`R <br /> Council agenda on the consent calendar. <br /> Discussion was held regarding recognition of in-kind contributions from area <br /> businesses and volunteers (i.e., Holiday Inn's use of their facility for the February <br /> kick-off event). <br /> Public Works Department <br /> Pavement <br /> g <br /> ment Management Plan PMP <br /> Each Councilmember made comments regarding the City's existing PMP and <br /> potential revisions. <br /> Councilmember Aplikowski was of the opinion that we should go forward with <br /> the City's current PMP and was not opposed to returning to a partial project in the <br /> Ingerson neighborhood. She suggested that, in the future,the Council might wish <br /> to publicly inform a respective neighborhood two (2)years in advance of the <br /> actual project. She stated that she was not in favor of raingardens with the City's <br /> soil structure;preferred curb and gutter installations, and would prefer a <br /> surmountable curb rather than no curb at all. She mentioned Hamline Avenue <br /> North and Carlton Drive as priorities for reconstruction. <br /> Councilmember Larson stated the Council needed to determine whether to <br /> perform street maintenance and reconstruction in small segments, or in a more <br /> comprehensive way, particularly in older portions of the community. He stated <br /> that,while it meant more intense work,the Council needed to be committed,no <br /> matter what public sentiment,to the overall benefit to the community, and define <br /> that commitment in its Assessment Policy. <br /> Councilmember Grant reiterated Councilmember Aplikowski's comments on the <br /> need for advance notification and discussion with the residents regarding any <br /> potential project and the need for the Council to establish the amount of flexibility <br /> prior to initiating the project. He also stated that the Council needed to establish <br /> thresholds for the pavement management index; publish those indexes; and put <br /> the entire package together prior to meeting with the public. Councilmember <br /> Grant stated he is against premature removal of road surfaces. Councilmember <br /> Grant stated that there were some roads in the community that were very bad,but <br /> we tended to turn a blind eye to them due to lack of assessment potential. <br /> Councilmember Grant suggested that the consulting engineer present several <br /> options (i.e., neighborhood A and/or B)rather than staff being the driving force in <br /> recommendations. Councilmember Grant was not in favor of Siems Court <br /> reconstruction, and didn't feel the necessity to go back into the Ingerson <br /> neighborhood to prove we were right and they were wrong. He further agreed <br /> that the Council needed to be of one mind prior to the initiation of any project, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.