CCP 10-30-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - October 10, 2000 f\ V ff'll;:T S~~ 5 Councilmember Larson stated the Council has a recommendation from City staff with rcgard to the revised report. He added the Council can disagree with staffs recommendations. He stressed that the Council must recognize the difference between deciding that the report is not what was requested, and agreeing or disagreeing with the report itsclf. Linda Swanson presented a petition signed by neighborhood residents to the bench requesting that the Council not accept the feasibility report. The petition was rcceiyed by the Council. Councilmember Rem stated she rcvicwed the minutes from thc Council's September 11 regular mceting at which this issuc was discussed. She added that there were some items requested by the Council which wcrc not included in the revised report. Councilmember Larson stated he disagrees with Councilmember Rem's statement that there are no differences between the feasibility study presentcd to the Council in 1999 and the revised feasibility report cunently under discussion. He noted the revised report contains recommendations regarding rain gardens, edged bands instead of curbs in some areas, and does not recommend 32' wide streets. He added the differences are significant. Councilmember Rem stated that some parts are different. She stressed that the issue of whether every street needs to be reconstructed remains. She added that the first feasibility study did not include 32' road widths. Councilmember Larson stated he can only recall one feasibility study. Councilmember Rem stated the first feasibility study was prepared in November of 1999. She added a second feasibility study was prepared later in 1999. Councilmember Larson stated the study prepared in November of 1999 was not a feasibility study. Councilmember Rem stated that the feasibility study should correspond with eaeh street's PCI number. Council member Larson stated that the neighborhood approach to pavement managcment, which recognizes that some streets might not need reconstruction as much as othcrs, should be rcvisited. Councilmembcr Rem asked how many neighborhoods the City could afford to complete at this rate. Councilmember Larson statcd the City has committed to completing one neighborhood every two years. Coul1cilmember Rem asked whether that would apply to every strcet in the neighborhood. Councilmember Larson confirmed this. Councilmember Grant stated the City should not begin a street reconstruction program on a neighborhood in which the streets are not in need of repair. I-Ie added this would minimize the investment made by the City years ago. He noted he would wish to review the City's Pavement Management Program. He expressed concern that the Council is discussing the issue with residents without being able to give specifics with regard to thc program. Councilmember Rem stated, with regard to the November 1999 engineering report, the cover sheet refers to the report as a "feasibility study". She added the Council acknowledged it was a feasibility study.