CC 04-29-1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meetin], 4-29-91 Page 5 SNELLING (Cent 'd) The Engineer stated a standard residential street is 32 feet wide; Snellin] Avenue is =ently 22-24 ft. wide. He explainErl the reason f= proposin] 36 feet is the anticipated parking on the west side of the street, due to the park property, which will be more than intennittent parking. He stated there is no provision in the inprovement f= controllin] traffic speed on the street; the speed limit will be 30 mph and enf=cement of the speed limit is an issue after inprovement of a street. Jim Ostlund, 1576 Royal Hills Drive, commented that he is pleased the city has adopted an assessment policy, however, it appears Snellin] Avenue is not a typical residential street. He noted the MSA designation is due to the traffic, which is not classified as residential traffic, and the residents are bein] assessed rather than utilizin] those funds. Ostlund questioned why the City is iroprovin] the street and if the proposed 9-ton design in=eases the cost. Ostlund stated he lives on a corner lot and paid 100% of the assessments for the street in front of his home. Maurer stated the 9-ton design does not change the assessment rate, only adds a small amount of additional blacktop, and the additional costs are paid by the City. Mike Winkels, 1575 Royal Hills Drive, reviewed the number of a=idents which have occurred on Snellin] durin] the past four years he has been a resident of Arden Hills. He recommended speed bumps be placed on the street or a gravel surface, rather than an inproved surface. Winkels stated the vehicles speed on the road in its current condition and ~in] the road will in=ease the problem. George Reilin], 661 Heinel Drive, Roseville, stated he owns undeveloped property adjacent to North Snellin] Avenue. He recalled that past practise by the city was to utilize state Aid funds to pay f= the inprovement of designated roads; questioned when the policy changed. Maurer advised there are two separate issues; the use of state Aid funds on a designated street and the City ability to assess a property. He explainErl the City may only use state Aid funds on a designated state Aid road and do not have to fund 100 percent of the inprovement project with the MSA funds; there is no requirement that there be no assessment on the project. Maurer stated the City policy states that persons on state Aid roads will be assessed similar to all other residents, the rationale bein] that all residents pay f= a road in front of their home. He explained the City is only allocated approxilllately $150,000.00 per year in state Aid funds. Reilin] questioned if the inprovement was petitioned and if any effort has been made to repair the road, rather than :iInprove it by reconstruction. He asked if the park property will be assessed. Mayor Sather advised the proposed ~ement is based on the pavement management rating of North Snellin] and was not initiated by petition. He explained the public works crew has repeatedly attempted to repair the roadway surface and found the patching does not adhere to the surface, since there is no solid foundation or solid walls for attachin] the patching materials. The Mayor advised the park property will not be assessed and the costs for the frontage will be borne by the general tax dollars. Reilin] stated he cannot afford anymore taxes and reviewed the increase in taxes on his property with the :iInprovement of Arden view Drive. He requested Council reconsider the iroprovement of the roadway.