CC 01-10-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 16 Ms. Swanson stated that the residents believe the loss of property, the potential detrimental environmental ramifications and the loss of neighborhood aesthetics was not worth the small amount of money available through Municipal State Aid funding. In the short amount of time that the residents have had to learn about roadways, they have come to realize that the most economical and effective means of dealing with surface water is to allow the water to soak naturally into the soil and allow it to naturally be clcansed of its impurities. The residents want the City Council to look at alternatives that have already been tried and found beneficially, such as rain gardens. The residents were not asking the Council to break a mold and be the innovator of new concepts. Ms. Swanson noted that according to the feasibility report, the reconstruction costs included traffic control with a unit price of $25,000 and signage for a total of $2,400 per street. She askcd what type of traffic control and signage the City was proposing and where the City proposed to construct them. Mr. Brown stated that the traffic control was proposed only during the construction pcriod and was not a permanent featurc. He indicated that the cost shown in the feasibility for traffic control was a total of $25,000 for all streets. Other than the current proposed plan, Ms. Swanson asked what alternative plans had been investigated by the City Council. Mayor Probst stated that the City has not investigated other plans. Ms. Swanson asked when the residents will receive an itemized breakdown for all project expenditures. Mayor Probst statcd that an itemization will be available when the final details of the project are determined. Ms. Swanson asked ifthere will be an itemized breakdown for each resident Mayor Probst stated that there will not be a breakdown for each resident. Ms. Swanson asked who will cover the costs of the proposed ponding if the City does not receive additional funding from the Rice Creek Watershed District. Mayor Probst stated that the City would either have to back off on part of the project or find other City funds. I-Ie indicated that thc basis of the assessments was a hypothetical 32 foot wide street and the assessments were for less than one-quarter of the total project cost. Councilmember Larson stated that there was a misunderstanding regarding how the assessments were calculated. He has heard it stated that the assessments were paying for the storm water retention ponds and other aspects of this project. He stated that the assessments were based on the cost of street improvements only. It is the policy of Arden Hills to assess 50 percent of the cost for street reconstruction and, in this case the assessments represent less than one-half of the street improvement costs. He noted that the 1998 street assessments had been $39.99 per foot. Ms. Swanson noted that the other City funds that may be used to pay for portions of the project would essentially be the resident's money. Councilmember Larson agreed that all the money being spent is the City's money and comes out of many different funds. However, the money being assessed was for street improvements only and reiterated that the assessment for this ncighborhood was for less than 50 percent of the street improvement costs. Ms. King notcd that the proposed assessments would be for one-forth of the total project cost. Councilmember Larson agreed, however, he statcd that the assessments wcrc based on the street