Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 4-29-91 <br />Page 11 <br /> <br />There was discussion relative to assessing the additional <br />areas 50 percent versus 100 percent. <br /> <br />Attorney Filla explained the residents contacted to sign the petition should be <br />advised that they are requesting to be aE"E"essed 100 percent of the costs. <br /> <br />PIIMI' . M:iMI' . (Cont' d) <br /> <br />Councilmember Hansen stated the residents retain the right to appeal the <br />assessment rate at the public hearing. <br /> <br />Councilmember Mahowald questioned if Council has the ability to add both areas to <br />the project at this time. <br /> <br />Engineer Maurer explained the Council has the ability to add the area, however, <br />the entire project would revert back to the beginning of the schedule listed in <br />the feasibility study. <br /> <br />Attorney Filla questioned if both cul-de-sacs should be included in the project. <br /> <br />Council directed the Clerk Administrator to notify Mr'. Baude, in writing, of the <br />procedures for including Chatham Court and Chatham Circle in the project, at the <br />assessment rate of $5.64 per front foot. <br /> <br />Mayor Sather asked for further COII1lOOllts on the assessment. There was no response <br />and the May= called for connnents on the closing of Valentine Avenue. <br /> <br />Engineer Maurer explained the two alternatives f= closing the road; the first <br />being construction of a cul-de-sac on Valentine Avenue, near the intersection of <br />Valentine Court, so vehicles would enter fram the west off of County Road F, and <br />the second being elimination of the roadway between Valentine Crest and Valentine <br />Court. He explained the second alternative is less desirable, as some of the <br />properties would require long driveways and this may =eate liability problems <br />f= the City. Maurer recommended the first alternative and advised it would <br />require some land aOIUisition to accomplish. He advised that meetings with the <br />residents indicate an initial willingness to provide the right-of-way ~~Eary. <br />He referred to a possible 60 ft. access easement in the area, however, no <br />documentation of dedication to the city has been found in the records. <br /> <br />eouncilmember Malone stated the properties :iropa.cted by the placement of a <br />cul-de-sac at that location would be Boesel, McCleary and Kunze. <br /> <br />Bob Kunze stated the residents he has contacted indicate a preference for closing <br />the street at Valentine Crest, with access to County Road F. He questioned the <br />worth or necessity of construction of a 60 ft. cul-de-sac for a road that is only <br />100 feet long. <br /> <br />Bob Boesel explained the Valentine Court intersection is substantially larger <br />than the Valentine Crest intersection. He stated he is willing to donate his land <br />to the City f= construction of the cul-de-sac at the Valentine Crest location. <br /> <br />Council discussed several items related to closing the road and the land <br />acquisition ~~""'ry f= construction of a cul-de-sac. <br /> <br />Engineer Maurer advised it would be difficult to accomplish the construction of a <br />cul-de-sac in conjunction with the overlay project, due to time constraints. He <br />suggested it may be best to delete this area fram the project until the issue is <br />resolved and add this area in a future project. He advised the construction of <br />the cul-de-sac may be accomplished this year if Council determines to do so to <br />resolve this matter. <br />