CCP 10-10-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 11,2000 11 was willing to carry the Section 8 vouchers for one additional year, he may be willing to discuss the issue with the City. Mayor Probst asked ifit was known whether the sale of the property was imminent. Mr, Lynch stated that he was not certain. Mayor Probst suggested that the first step would be to determine if the property is expected to sell in the near future, MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to direct City Staff to determine whether the owner of the Hunter's Park Apartment intends to sell the property in the near future and to encourage the property owner to continue to make affordable housing available within the apartment complex. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). B. 2001 Pavement Management Program (PMP) 1. Combined Staff/Review Group Recommendations Mayor Probst stated that City Staffwill provide a review of the proposed recommendations for the 2000/2001 Street Improvement Project. The City Council will then discuss those recommendations and the net result oftonight's action will be to offer direction to the City Engineer and Staff in terms of revising the feasibility study. Once the revised feasibility study is completed, it will come back to the City Council for further discussion to determine whether to proceed with or to modify the project. He asked that if an audience member wished to address the Council they raise their hand and come to the microphone. He asked that the audience members identify themselves with names and addresses and to try to keep their comments concise in order to expedite this discussion. Mr. Brown provided a summary of the 2000/2001 Street Improvement Project issues. He stated that the need for street reconstruction was determine through a City-wide rating of the streets. He stated that the city streets were grouped into neighborhoods and the streets were rated according to the surface condition of the streets, whether the streets had curb and gutters, their widths, whether there was a drainage system, and the water quality. Mr. Brown slated that the Ingerson neighborhood had been identified through the rating process as needing an entire reconstruction of all the streets in some form. He slated that other factors considered in making this determination was the water quality benefits that could be gained, the availability of funds via Slate Aid, the general condition of the streets and existing drainage system, and the lack of curbs and gutters. Mr. Brown stated staff agrees that the project has merit but is willing to address neighborhood concerns with design. The Task Force generally concurs that the project has merit with changes with one exception. With regard to whether the original feasibility report should be adopted, staff agrees that the original report needs revising to address neighborhood concerns. The Task Force also agrees that the original report needs revising.