Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 4-10-89 <br />, <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />CASE #89-03 (Cont'd) Malone moved, seconded by Hansen, that Council approve <br />Case #89-03, Site Plan Revision for Building Addition, <br />1313 West County Road E, McDonalds, for a six-foot by 40-foot addition to provide <br />a cashier's window and office space, based on the following: 1) The modifications <br />will create a healthier, safer and more convenient service for patrons and the <br />general public, and 2) The modifications are considered minor and the special use <br />is existing, so treating the application as a site plan revision is appropriate. <br />Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) <br /> <br />REPORT OF CITY ENGINEER <br /> <br />RES. #89-18; APRV. <br />PLANS & SPECS, ST. <br />SEWER, 1680 OAK AVE <br /> <br />Council was referred to a report from Clerk Administrator <br />Berger dated 4-5-89, regarding the proposed storm sewer <br />utilities to serve the area of Oak Avenue. <br /> <br />Donald Lund, SEH, was present to review the plans prepared by Engineer Peters. He <br />explained the proposal is to install a 12" storm sewer from Oak Avenue to connect <br />with the existing 15" pipe on the Ramsey County park property; the plans include <br />construction of catch basins and resurfacing in the area where damage occurs due <br />to construction of the sewer line. <br /> <br />Lund advised the estimated cost of the sewer construction is $13,200.00. He <br />referred to Peters letter dated 4-10-89, which recommends the City seek informal <br />quotes rather than advertise for bids, since the project costs are below $15,000. <br />The letter also states that if the Council decides the costs will be assessed, he <br />recommends a feasibility report be prepared and a date set for pubic hearing with <br />the affects residents. Lund explained that the City will need to acquire drainage <br />and utility easement to construct and maintain the storm sewer; Peters <br />recommended the City Attorney begin the process of obtaining the easement. <br /> <br />Malone moved, seconded by Hansen, that Council approve <br />Resolution No. 89-18, Approving Plans And Specifications For The Installation Of <br />Storm Sewer Utilities To Serve 1680 Oak Avenue And Adjacent Areas (Improvement <br />No. ST 89-02). Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) <br /> <br />Acting Attorney Filla explained that if the City decides to specially assess the <br />costs of the project a public hearing is required; he suggested Council reserve <br />the possibility of the assessment process by holding a public hearing. <br /> <br />Micheal Daub, Attorney representing the Albergs, suggested Council consider <br />dispensing with the public hearing process. He stated the cost is less than <br />$15,000.00, it appears there are fewer property owners that are affected by the <br />improvement and, he reminded Council the public hearing process will extend the <br />time for project completion. Daub pointed out that Dr. Alberg is interested in <br />completion of the project and has indicated he will pay the costs to resurface <br />his driveway. Daub recommended Council proceed with the informal bid process. <br /> <br />There was Council discussion relative to assessing the costs of the proposed <br />project. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hansen questioned if the residents in the area had been previously <br />assessed for storm sewera <br /> <br />Filla and Berger advised they had not researched previous assessments. <br /> <br />Mayor Sather suggested the public hearing process be followed; he explained the <br />Council may decide not to assess the project, however, the option remains opena <br /> <br />Filla questioned if the plans prepared by the Engineer are sufficient to <br />advertise for bids. <br /> <br />Lund stated the plans are detailed enough to advertise for bids, however, a <br />feasibility study would have to be prepared. <br /> <br />There was discussion relative to the costs and time period for preparation of a <br />feasibility report and advertisement for bids. It was determined the completion <br />date of the project would be delayed approximately two weeks if the formal bid <br />process is followed and the feasibility report would not be lengthy. <br />