CCWS 01-18-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION - JANUARY 18, 2000 3 . The City Council expressed concerns regarding the public perception of the historical process for determining and assessing improvement projects, with a consensus of the need to improve communication levels. It was the consensus of the Council that, due to the organization of the Ingerson neighborhood, this first year's project be used as a pilot lor a more interactive resident/Council communication process for future improvement projects. Staff was directed to prepare a draft proposal for the City Council prior to the January 31, 2000 regular meeting, encapsulating a proposal for moving forward with additional communication to let the neighborhood know that the City was seeking more detail than was included in the initial feasibility report (via a neighborhood flyer/newsletter), and for suggestions and plans for a task force of neighborhood residents, the City Engineer, appropriate staff, and rotating Council Liaison. Mayor Probst suggested that further Council action on the proposed 2000 Street Improvement Project be tablcd, and any additional survey work related to the project with the exception of the soil borings already scheduled be put on hold, pending the outcome of the January 31st discussion with the residents and distribution of the neighborhood information flyers. Councilmembers sought clarification ofthc purpose and specific charge to tile proposed task force. Items for consideration and clarification included whether the task force would have negotiating authority regarding the scope or feasibility ofthe project, or if it was to hear suggestions of the residents, City Engineer and staff and react with a . recommendation to the full City Council; if additional study was warranted regarding drainage issucs (i.e., feasibility of ponds vs. rain gardens in clay soils); differing expectations of City Council and residents at the outset; amount of time the task force has for making it's recommendation to the City Council; the financial impacts of alternatives being considered; the final per foot assessment cost if Hamline is deleted; and concerns about its MSA funding status. Mayor Probst stated, and Councilmembers concurred that the purpose of the task force would not be for negotiation. The City Engineer needs to make sound recommendations to the City Council on the recommended final scope ofthe project (i.e., Hamline Avenue included in the project) with the City Council making the final decision in the best interest of the community. d. Ramsev County League of Local Governments (RCLLG) Priority Issues Survev Councilmembers reviewed their recommended legislative priorities for forwarding to the RCCLLG. Staff was directed to include the following legislative priorities, as previously provided to the League of Minnesota Cities and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities: .