CCP 06-08-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting, May 26, 1987 . Page 3 ARDEN OAKS CT. Council was referred to Public Safety/Works Committee LIGHTING REQ. minutes of 5-2l-87; relative to a request for residents of Arden Oaks Court to place decorative street lights on their properties in the City's easement. David Angell and Gary Kremer. residents of Arden Oaks Court, were present and advised Council that they would like to install, at their own expense, decorative streets lights on each of the seven lots in the cul-de-sac. They stated that the street is dark. there has been vandalism in the area and it is their opinion the lights would promote a safer neighborhood environment. Kremer . stated the residents would pay for the installation, electricity and maintenance, however. they are requesting permission to place the lights near the curb, in the City's easement. Council discussed whether or not the placement of the lights would interfere with snowp1owing and questioned liability for damage to the lights. Paul Malone, member of the PS/W Committee, advised Council the Committee members were not opposed to the lighting concept; their concern was in setting a preceden~ by allowing placement in the City's easement. Since the meeting. however. Malone noted that he has seen other areas of the City where the lights are placed on the easement. Kremer commented that the light placement, near the curb boxes and mailboxes, . may aid the plowing crews in determining how far away they should stay when plowing in the area. , In discussion. it was noted that there would be seven lights which are powered individually to each home. therefore, the homeowner assumes responsibility for maintenance and installation. Council concurred that the lights should be placed no closer than the curb boxes, approximately 3 ft. from the curb. and preferably behind the boxes. Moved by Hansen, seconded by Peck, that Council approve t.he request for the residents of Arden Oaks Court to install and maintain, at their expense, decorative street lights on their respective properties upon the City's easement; cont.ingent upon the placement of the light.s being in line with or behind the existing curb boxes on their properties and in no case closer than 3 feet to the curb. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) WATERMAIN EXT. Public Works Supervisor Raddatz advised Council that he AGREEMENT prefers to withdraw his request for extension of the watermain on public right-of-way to serve his property on Round Lake. He stated the Engineering costs were, in his opinion. exorbitant. PARK DEDICATION Council was referred to letter from Attorney Thomas EDGEWATER EST. Zappia, dated 5-13-87. regarding the Park Dedication fee for Edgewater Estates. . Councilman Sather explained the proposal of 1.6 acres of land and an additional monetary fee equal to .54 acres of land which was calculated at $1.435.80. Sather recommended Council approval of the proposed park dedication; he also advised that Mr. McGuire would request an occupancy certificate in July, however, there are two conditions stipulated that would have to be met prior to issuance of the certificate: 1. Approval of the garage sprinkling issue from the LJVFD Fire Chief and 2. Approval of the exterior lighting and landscape plans. Counci1member Winiecki stated she W~U1d prefer to see more information on how the land values were calculated. Council discussed the possibility of contacting Ramsey County to obtain the figures for the sale price of the land for comparison with the estimated market values listed in Zappia's letter. Sather noted the park land dedication . provides the Cit.y access to a park parcel and reminded Council of McGuire's inconvenience during construction of this land due to the construction of the sewer interceptor. He also stated that the land was unimproved and the developer paid his own improvement costs. Sather moved, seconded by Hansen. that Council approve t.he park dedication for Edgewater Estates, as outlined in the letter from Attorney Thomas Zappia (5-13-87). of 1.6 acre parcel of land and monetary fee equal to .54 acres of land calculated at $l,435.80. contingent upon the garage sprinkling system issue being approved by Fire Chief Winkel and the landscape and exterior lighting plan approval by Council. Motion carried. (Sather Hansen, Peck. Woodburn voting in favor; Winiecki opposed) (4-l)