Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 29, 1999 <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />She noted that, in the time that she has lived in the neighborhood, school buses have never <br />stopped at Lexington Avenue. The school buses either stop at Edgewater Road or Shoreline <br />Lane. Additionally, there have been emergencies with fire trucks and ambulances and these <br />vehicles have had no problem turning around. <br /> <br />Mr. Albert Hohmann, 3154 Shoreline Lane, stated that two day ago a neighbor on Shoreline <br />Lane had a diabetic coma and one ambulance and two police cars responded to the emergency. <br />He indicated that 40 years ago there had been a turn around at the end of Shoreline Lane and <br />there is still a large lot, which is used for a turn around. For this reason there are no safety issues <br />with regard to the configuration of the street. <br /> <br />The motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />B. Finance Committee Presentation, Joint Maintenance Facility Funding Options <br />Mr. Mertensotto stated that when he appeared before the City Council last year the intent of the <br />Finance Committee was to bring the Joint Facility Maintenance Facility project to the attention <br />of the City Council. Since that time, the Finance Committee has met with Ehlers who were <br />assisting the City of Hutchinson with their joint facility project. <br /> <br />The fundamental issues of these discussions had been regarding timing and control. Ehlers had <br />discussed the fact that control is the most important issue. The Finance Committee looked at the <br />City as being either a tenant in the joint facility, being the financing lead agency in the joint <br />. facility, or constructing a new facility for exclusive Arden Hills' use. <br /> <br />The Finance Committee provided a chart that showed how Arden Hills would stand in either a <br />high level of control or a low level of control. At the lowest level the City would be a tenant, at <br />the highest level, the City would be owner. <br /> <br />With regard to feasibility, Ramsey County was contacted to find out if this project has been <br />included in their Capital plan. It was found that the project has been proposed, however, nothing <br />has been funded. <br /> <br />The cost for the project would be approximately $2 million dollars if the City were the sole <br />occupant. If the project were a joint facility with Ramsey County the cost would be <br />approximately $13 million dollars. <br /> <br />The Finance Committee considered the likelihood of achieving the facility and the timeliness <br />according to the various levels of control. Another issue was the visual impact and to what <br />degree the City could influence the appearance of a joint facility without being the landlord. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The Finance Committee did explore several financing options and the funding could be from a <br />General Revenue Bond that would eliminate the need for a market based levy referendum. This <br />is assuming that, since it would be a sewer and water related facility, one-third of the project <br />could be funded in cash up front and only two-thirds of the project would be bonded. <br />