Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> !W uu m If' u .' . <br /> ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - DECEMBER 9. 1996 6 .. <br /> Council member Keim concurred with removing Snelling and Hamline Avenues and noted the <br /> . <br /> proposed 1998 project streets are more geographically close. <br /> Council member Malone explained the City's Assessment Policy and appeal process which I <br /> residents can take at the March 31,1997, assessment hearing to submit a formal assessment <br /> appeal. He then explained with regard to assessments of corner properties and advised the law <br /> requires that assessments are based on the benefit of the improvement. The intent of the . <br /> Assessment Policy is to be fair to properties of the same class. Hc advised that the Council will <br /> review each assessment to determine if adjustments are needed. With regard to the sewer gas I <br /> issue, Councilmember Malone stated he understands the concern and agreed with the need to <br /> resolve it. <br /> An unidentified resident asked if they will be informed of their assessment cost. Mayor Probst . <br /> advised an assessment notice will be mailed prior to the public hearing date. <br /> Councilmember Malone reviewed the notification process used for the assessment hearing and I <br /> advised the notice will contain the entire dollar amount of the assessment and the letter will <br /> indicate the individual lot assessment. I <br /> Council member Hicks stated he agrees with the comments made about the streets most likely to <br /> be removed, if needed (Snelling and Hamline Avenues). However, the pavement condition of .. <br /> those two is the lowest and if the Council believes in the process to evaluate and prioritize, then <br /> it would not make sense to remove them. <br /> Councilmember Hicks stated he is also concerned about the budget. He noted that during budget . <br /> discussions, the Council wanted the increase to be under three percent but the City is falling <br /> behind on the 30-year street maintenance cycle which concerns him. With regard to the debate I <br /> over reconstruction or repair and seal coat, Councilmember I-licks questioned the fiscal <br /> responsibility of doing repairs rather than reconstruction. He explained the City does not want to . <br /> spend more than needed and needs to get the best return on its expenditure. Councilmember <br /> Hicks pointed out that based on what the Engineer has indicated, that is not always doing repairs <br /> and patching where there are major drainage problems. . <br /> Mr. Stonehouse reviewed a picture of a segment of North Snelling which showed extensive <br /> cracking. In regards to the question of whether to repair or reconstruct, he explained isolated . <br /> repairs are not desirable due to the high expense of rehabilitation per square foot. Also, an <br /> overlay of the major cracks will reflect through the surface within one to two winters as will <br /> alligator cracks. He explained that sealcoating of these types of streets is also not an option since . <br /> it is an inefficient way to spend the City's road dollars. <br /> Councilmember Hicks asked if bidders will separate out street segments. Mr. Stonehouse stated . <br /> they will and explained the Council can determine which streets to remove after getting the bids. <br /> Councilmember Hicks stated he prefers to bid the 1997 Street Improvement Project as proposed .. <br /> I <br />