CC 11-13-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I. ARDEN lllLLS CITY COUNCIL - NOVEMBER 13, 1995 7 I Ms. Lois Rem, 1670 Glenview Court, indicated the reason for the questions from the residents I was that they wanted the Council to be comfortable with their decision. I Ms. Rem provided a letter to be entered in the record as Exhibit 6.c. She requested an explanation as to how the Ogren development would have gotten from the March plan, approved by Staff & Planning Commission, to its current state without the high level of involvement by I the residents. Mayor Probst indicated the original plan was not approved in March, it had not been reviewed by I the Council until October 10, 1995 where Council established conditions for approval. Mayor Probst expressed great concern for the notion there was something a-miss with the I protocol of this application and that there was more than simply a Planned Unit Development request involved. I Mayor Probst indicated he felt the Council had reached a compromise between the developer and the residents. He indicated although not all agree, there is a basic right to develop your land, .- This right can not be ignored. Motion carried nnanimously (5-0). I Resolution #95-78. Ordering Prelim.inarv Feasibility Report in the Matter ofthe 1996 Street Im1}rovement Project I City Engineer, Greg Stonehouse indicated the street re-rating was now complete. He provided the Council with a prioritized list of streets as compiled in accordance with the project schedule I and under the direction of Public Works Superintendent Stafford, Mr. Stonehouse indicated under the new system, streets with PCI ratings less than 60 will require I reconstruction or cold, in-place recycling; street ratings from 61 to 80 will be best maintained with a bituminous overlay; ratings form 81 to 90 will require a seal coat; and those rated above 90 will require no maintenance in the next two to three years. I Mr. Stonehouse indicated a general Feasibility Study will be completed to outline the necessary I improvements and associated costs for streets within the first and second priority categories. This will allow City staff to hold informational meetings with the public in the next several weeks to determine which streets will be reconstructed/rehabilitated in 1996. Following those I informational meetings, Staff would revise the Feasibility Study specifically toward the selected streets, and schedule the formal Public Hearing to allow the project to proceed. Ie I