Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout78-078 , ~ 7J'-7f (pl. It) . Extract of Minutes of Meeting of City 'Council City of Arden Hills Ramsey County, Minnesota November 27, 1978 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, was held in the City Hall in said City on Monday, the 27th day of November, 1978, at 8:00 o'clock p. m. The following members were present: Acting Mayor Woodburn and Councilmen Crichton, Hanson, and Wingert; and the following was absent: Mayor Crepeau Also present were: Charlotte McNiesh, City Clerk Admini- strator; Don Lamb, City Treasurer; Don Christoffersen, City consulting, engineer; and Peter S. Popovich, City Bond Consultant. The City Clerk Administrator presented an affidavit showing publication of notice of. hearing on proposed Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-78-3 in accordance with the resolution adopted October 30, 1978, which affidavit was examined and found to be satisfactory and was directed to be filed by the Clerk Admini- strator. The City Clerk Administrator also exhibited a Cer- tificate of Mailing Notice of Hearing to all affected property ~ owners, which certificate was examined and found to be satis- factory and was directed to be filed by the Clerk Administrator. 1 , All persons present were then afforded opportunity to be hear d. and the names ahd addresses of the persons appearing and 4It heard by the Council, and the substance of the views presented by them were as follows: MR. DON CHRISTOFFERSEN, city consulting engineer: This is for proposed Improvement 78-3, Karth Lake Estates West. As indicated on the screen - the boundaries of Karth Lake Estates West - this is the southerly line, this is Amble Road in this vicinity, and this is the extension of Nursery Hill Road as constructed today. This is the north line of Karth Lake Estates West, and the south line. The west line is here, and the east line is Karth Lake. The streets proposed in this development extend from the existing street at this point to a semi-cul-de-sac running westerly to a cul-de-sac, and another street going southerly to Amble Road. The street is proposed to be 34 feet in width, designed for less than 400 vehicles per day, 7-ton load street, will have bituminous surfacing and concrete curb and gutter. The sanitary sewer proposed to serve the development would be constructed (inaudible) a manhole on the westerly portion of the cul-de-sac, running easterly to another manhole, and southerly to the sanitary sewer. Also, a (inaudible) would be constructed from a road here to intercept this sanitary sewer. Sanitary sewer will serve the abutting lots. The watermain proposed will connect to the existing water- main at this point, follow generally on the north side of the street, and terminate at this point. Another stretch of watermain would loop the Nursery (inaudible) and connect to the Amble system and connect at Amble Road. . Storm drainage improvements are as shown on the southerly portion of the street generally, draining to a detention basin and outward to an existing storm sewer and on to Karth Lake. You will note that we have provided inlet points for the basins, or the swampy areas to the south, as an assurance that the basins will not be overflowed and flood the newly constructed property. It is not the intent of these outlets to drain the ponding areas, but to keep them at a normal level. Also, we have one constructed in this position. Storm sewers are located in this position. (Inaudible) and storm sewer running to this point and draining back to the detention basin, and one from this point over, and also into the detention basin, and then out into Karth Lake. ' We find that this project is a feasible undertaking, and recommend it be constructed as proposed. 2 . i i' E f re I , " Mr. Popovich will cover the financing. I might add - on the financing portion of it -we have utilized a lot basis, and for the worst condition, we have assumed there were 17 lots that could be assessed. As the Council is well aware, you have flexibility in assessing, and it may be discussed at this time, but for our feasibility study we used 17 lots. There may be more. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: Mr. Popovich, will you explain the methods and meaning of possible financing. MR. PETER S. POPOVICH, city bond consultant: The total published cost of this project has been rounded off to $200,000 and, of course, based on a per lot charge. As you know from the plat, there are some 20 lots on the drawing. Mr. Christoffersen feels if you eliminate Lots 1, 2 and 5 - 1 and 2 are on the north part and 5 is where the pond is - then that would be some 17 remaining lots, and dividing that by $200,000 will come to $11,765 per lot. On the other hand, if you extend the project from the southern portion of Karth Lake Estates down toward Amble ' Road, or old vacated Highway 51, there's a thought there would be two additional lots that could be assessed because of benefits they'd receive there because of the road being extended. That ,would give a total of 19 lots and the approximate cost per lot would be $10,526, or roughly $1200 per lot less going from 17 to 19 lots. It's proposed this be 100% assessed and be spread over a 20 year period with an 8% carrying charge and a right of prepayment as has been the customary policy of the city. I think the big question is to determine the extension of the street to the south and whether there would be two additional lots and the assessment of those besides the viability of 1, 2 and 5. 5 is quite obvious. There may be a question as to I or 2 and maybe Don can address himself to that. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: Mrs. McNiesh,. any writ ten comments? MRS. MCNIESH: There are none. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: We will open the hearing now to questions. I will start first with questions from the council and comments from those who may be interested. MR. POPOVICH: I should point out one factor. The original matter was 100% petitioned for and referred to the engineer, and it was the additional land to the south that required the public hearing. If it had stopped, you could have ordered the improve~' ment without a public hearing so I assume the people that petitioned - we have received nothing that they have retracted any of those petitions - so that's a proper assumption for you to make and we should address ourselves to that area to the south as to how those property owners feel. 3 . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: There's one other thing I'd like to clarify. There's a lot abutting the proposed street on this side. The one on the other side I believe is tax delinquent, but the first one mayor may not be added in the per unit charges. They're getting sanitary sewer and water from Amble, but may receive a benefit from this portion of the street. Also, the reason that I deleted Lots 1 and 2 from the total assessment is because this configuration is slightly different from what was platted in the Karth Lake Estates, and I believe they're replatting and changing the configuration of the lots. There were services there under the Karth Lake Estates Improvement and that's why they were deleted in this one. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: You mean this could be assessed - the southernmost lot? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: This would be an option up to the Council whether they would like to apply an assessment or feel these people receive a benefit from the street. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: I'll have the Council make their comments or ask questions. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: I have four questions of Mr. Popovich. In the costs that are estimated, is the cost of acquiring the land for that road included? I realize there's a tax forfeited land at the bottom. MR. POPOVICH :We 1Dok Don' s figures and rounded them off. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: There are contingencies to allow for normal (inaudible) so it should be covered. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: which deals with the whole that would be filled. Mr. Christoffersen, One more question area. There are two ponds - "c" and "F" MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Yes. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: I seem to recall in the last year or so, one or ,possibly two ponds just south of Amble Road in the same drainage system that you felt should not be filled. Is there some reason? . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: They're also tied in with this network of drainage. I can show you a ,better picture. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: with the drainage system. These can be filled without tampering Why couldn't those? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: we didn't have an outlet could be filled provided At the time we were for this other area. adequate drainage be discussing those It's possible they included. 4 . COUNCILMAN HANSON: I'd like to have the engineer refresh my memory as to why we decided to extend that connecting road south from Nursery Hill. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Might I ask Mr. Miller to explain that because he was involved in all of the Planning Commission's work and I was not. I did not attend those meetings. Perhaps Mr. Miller could provide a better answer than I. MR. ORLYN MILLER, Wehrman, Chapman Associates, City Planners: There were basically three options expressed at the time of the first proposal- and maybe DOn might want to help me with this. (Showing diagrams) In terms of lqt layout, this is basically the same with some modification. The concern is Nursery Hill Lane extends to Hamline on the far left and it would create a cul-de- sac of approximately 1700 feet. The Ordinance limits the extent of the length of a cul-de-sac to 500 feet (inaudible) 18 lots are served, in which case it could be somewhat longer. In this case it's substantially more than 18 lots. I believe something of that nature is already served by Nursery Hill Lane. There was con- cern expressed by ourselves and by the Planning Commission that we search out a way to resolve the circulation problem (inaudible) that length of cUl-depsac. Three different basic options were open. One is to accept - by waiving that requirement at the time of planning - to accept a longer cul-de-sac. Another is to plainly deny any development in which the city gets in somewhat of a vulnerable position in that this area is (inaudible) landlocked by past decisions and we felt we should seek out some way to provide for development for the benefit of the developer as well as the city, and the third option was to seek some way to provide a loop system to Hamline or Amble Road, so we did look at a variety of ways. Obviously, as you can see on the left $ide of that, the existing homes and the spacing,is such that it would require taking of the developed lands, lots that are already developed. We had to seek out other ways, trying to determine where same of the openings might be. . There was, at one time, some sort of easement here that showed up on the plat. We did clarify that it wasn't as public as we thought at the time we did these studies. That there is some kind of access easement back here but not a platted street, but we did look at the possibility of extending over there - providing access to Amble Road at the end (inaudible) existing home con- struction, there is a home on this lot at this time and the narrowness of the area just made that somewhat infeasible. This configuration simply shows how the Amble property which gets landlocked in the process of creating a road (inaUdible) however, if we put it here ,we still had this landlocked property here that could not be subdivided efficiently to get access in that manner. 5 . . This way we were just looking at (inaudible) might provide some access for some additional lots that way. It certainly did not reflect the best road layout (inaudible). We would gain nothing relative to the cul-de-sac lane. In fact, it would be greater, but if this were cut off at this point we would have gained access to Amble property for potential future develop- ment which would have been a more desirable (inaudible) the two owners combined in a plat to resolve the entire problem in the area. We encouraged them to do that, but have no power to force that situation. We then looked at some of the options of carrying through and all we ended up with in the final analysis was just a hybrid of this (inaudible)access agreement here that could apply to a third lot. We were just studying some (inaudible) al ignments to develop which would reflect the best circulation. It was our intention to design a system that would not encourage traffic, but provide another outlet. Those two are basically the same with minor variations, and yet another would have, in this manner, served the Amble property with the potential of creating four lots instead of three by bringing the right-of-way down so it could be expanded into this property, or constructing the cul-de-sac on this, but providing by land trading something that would have been required that both owners enter into the plat at this time. Of course, that didn't happen so the final we ended up with is what you were looking at first. Basically, to reiterate the three options, to accept the long cul-de-sac, which I pointed out is not the only one like it in the city although it's not in a situation where we have an abundance of those nor should we - there's one on Oak Avenue that's serving a similar amount of lots, somewhat less, but over 18. There are other longer cul-de-sacs beyond 500 feet, but not too many of them serve beyond the 18 units. That being one option. The second is to just not. allow it to develop until a variety of property owners could get something together, and the third (inaudible) to force a connection somewhere. This seemed to be the most logical. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: I think Oak Avenue was installed before the (inaudible). MR. MILLER: That could be. COUNCILMAN HANSON: One other comment. These alternatives that have been presented on the slides, none of which showed Nursery Hill Court ever going directly out to Amble? MR. MILLER: No. No, because we eliminated that option because of the developed lots and we pursued this other - first the one far on the right to the end of Amble Road because we thought there might be part of a right-of-way there, and when we found out not, then we pursued this route because there was the tax delinquent 6 . property which made that available for a good part of the extra right-of-way needed and so we had only one other property owner to deal with in this case, and it was not developed property. That was a key factor, that it was not developed. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: If you have any comments or name and address. The meeting is now open for comments. questions, could you rise, state your MR. ARTHUR FREICHELS, 1292 Nursery Hill Lane: Are the lots there the only ones to be assessed for the improvements? Because I live on Nursery Hill Lane and I do have a letter. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The let 'Ers that were sent out to people on Nursery Hill Lane were for informational purposes, and I doubt they would be assessed for this improvement. MR. POPOVICH: The legal description was broader, and the notice went out to more people than the existing lots that we have been discussing. It's broad enough and, as you know, when you order an improvement if there were some benefit to these other people then obviously you could consider the assessment, and that's one reason why they received the notice. On the other hand, there was no intention in our presentation as we saw it, and as the engineer saw it, to assess anybody other than the particular lots we have addressed ourselves to. . MR. CHARLES AMBLE, 1211 Amble Road: First of all, I would like to straighten out the record. Somehow or another I was construed as saying - making some remark to the effect that people on Nursery Lane.were objecting to this entry on Amble Road. I did not say that and I did not mean that. I appreciate all the effort that was put into this thing by the engineers here, but somehow I feel that this strip ,of land,- I would like to have the second slide that you have up there. This particular strip of land in here is a wooded section that I feel is being abused. This road - proposed road that you have going through here will reduce this from a five-lot plot to a three-lot plot which is a considerable loss, plus the fact you're landlocking it, or arranging it in such a way to also reduce its value some more, plus the fact we're going to get some more assessments. We've been burned with assessments to the point where we can't stand any more. There are a number of people in our community who are out of their element in talking about these things and all they do is get hung with these assess- ments. I further feel - and I'm not talking about Nursery Lane - I further feel Amble Road has enjoyed the privacy of a dead-end road for ,some time and I just don't feel that a group of people should come out and design something like this and deadlock or phony up something to make a pleasant thing for themselves and to hell with you, and come out on Amble Road without some kind of round-table discussion before all this expense is brought about with the engineers of our village, so I object to the whole thing. 7 . . ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: Have there been any discussions of this in the Planning Commission. MRS. DOROTHY ZEHM, Deputy Clerk: We have had a public hearing and have had comments from the residents - probably the same people that are here tonight. MR. MILLER: This was discussed at several Planning Commission meetings. MR. ARTHUR ERICKSON, 1297 Nursery Hill Lane: I do,in a certain respect, gO along with Mr. Amble and I'm sorry his property is involved, but the people on Nursery Hill Lane (inaudible) the traffic congestion on Hamline with a school bus stop plus the pemtom town houses directly south of us, we would like - I'm speaking for myself and four other neighbors - would like at least one other exit on this Nursery Hill Court on to Amble Road. Not necessarily Hamline because that would put four exits on Hamline within 200 yards of each other and I feel that would be a bad safety factor, but with respect to Mr. Amble, I'm sorry for him and I can see his point of view, but I'm sure he can see our point of view for the traffic congestion on Hamline and Nursery Hill Lane. We would like to see another exit on to Amble Road. I also talked to the Fire Chief tonight. I'm a member of the Fire Department, and it would be beneficial for the Fire Department to have more than one entry into this Nursery Hill Court. We realizefuat we can't influence your decision, but this is our feeling that we would like another exit on Nursery Hill Court. ' MR. JEROME WEAVER, 1330 Amble Road: There's a lot of congestion. The school bus stops there and I don't buy that argument and I don't see why an entrance on Hamline would benefit because I think there's a lot of traffic on Amble. All the kids stand across the street. If nothing else, the traffic should be slowed down with all the kids there. Another thing- I know one woman in particular who lives on Lot 14 and you mentioned people there might be assessed in the future. To me that's a good way of getting around (inaudible) all of a sudden you got that assessment in the future. I assume that it could be in the future some people could be assessed if it benefits them. Maybe that's a way to find out by splitting the costs. Mr. Amble, I know, has tried to keep things as rustic as possible. He left the woods and a lot of things have been filled in. The swamp has been filled in. My brother and I own a swamp across Amble Road and we were told if we wanted to put some fill in they said it was not possible and now I hear it may be possible. I don't know - sometimes I get a little disgusted. It sounds like a big development talks and somebody else who wants to fill one lot he can't do a thing, but all of a sudden it changes and I don't understand the picture now, but I guess I don't see why the road couldn't go out to Hamline Avenue. I assume the building had started on the end there on Lots 8 and 10 (inaudible) in the cul-de~sac. 8 . COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: There are existing houses on Hamline. MR. WEAVER: I thought the road could have been put through to Ham1ine there. I don't see why not. FROM THE AUDIENCE: Pardon me - there are two houses there. MR. WEAVER: But as far as the traffic on Nursery Hill Lane, there's plenty on Amble Road and I don't think it's fair to Mr. Amble to be cutting through Mr. Amble's property either. It's too bad there isn't another way to solve it. I'm with Mr. Amble 100% on that. I just can't see it. MR. RICHARD PEDERSON, 1224 Amble Road: They did this to me about a month ago. Hill is developing the piece south of me and he was proposing a cul-de-sac and he wanted to come down through my orchard. They just went to the Planning Commission and said let's drive it here - he's a little guy and I'm putting in a $2 million development - the hell with his land. They turned it around for me. I had a little help from Mr. Crichton there, but it's the little guy that gets stuck, and it's the Planning Commission doesn't come to you. They don't call you in and say, rather than an easement or condemnation can we get together and buy your property. They just plow right ahead and do it and it gets dis- gusting at times. You drive (inaudible) to Amble Road. What about Amble Road out to Hamline? Will it be up-graded with more assessments. That can't handle 400 a day. Have the engineers given consideration (inaudible) MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: 400 traffic is a minimal construction to be designed on residential streets of Arden Hills and does not necessarily (inaudible) the traffic flow here. MR. RICHARD PEDERSON; Have you seen Amble Road? A few years ago when the sewer was put in in the fall, we agreed to the bond issue because they were not going to put water in. There were no plans for water on Amble Road. The next spring they came in and chewed up the road they put in the fall before. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: 17 lots possibly we're talking about. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: (inaudible) eight trips would be very conservative. . ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: Driveway per resident. MR. MILLER: The traffic assignment is using 8 or 9 per dwelling. I would agree with Mr. Christoffersen that's fairly high but th~are projecting on that basis and I have verified that several times. 9 MR. PEDERSON: You were talking about 17 lots being assessed the $200,000 and you said there's a possibility of more. Who owns the other two from 17 to 19? . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I don't know the owners - I believe Mr. Amble owns these. There are 20 lots, and subtracting this, this and this makes 17 - two more full assessment meaning sewer, watermain and street would be these two, and this one potential for street only. lolR. PEDERSON: Who owns those? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I believe Mr. Amble owns these. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: The Council has to decide who gets assessed and they're saying the other two affecting Mr. Amble might be considered, and the dher one might be considered - just giving us the full set of information. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: Any further connuents? COIIlIllents of the Council, or questions? COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: Mr. Christoffersen - or Mr. Miller, if we assumed this was the best '\\lay of enabling the development with the area to be developed, but chose not to extend the north- south leg of Amble until such time as say Mr. Amble's property was developed, what would be the ramifications of just proceeding to install the east-west part at this time? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I guess I would recommend, as long as you're constructing, to at least get it down to this point primarily because it would be difficult then to go back in and construct this piece and actually assess it against the develop- ment that's occurring at this time. . COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: Even if you took it to the southern boundary of this property it would mean until the other area is developed there would be no other access to Nursery Hill Court. MR. MILLER: I would point out if that were the direction _ taken that the tax forfeit land should also be reserved, otherwise you have that problem in the future, so if that would be the option taken,which we had discussed - determined it was better for resolution of the entire problem to build it at this time - but that portion of the right-of-way should be reserved for the future and that would leave only the Amble Lane and that would be the only missing portion. COUNCILMAN WINGERI': Are you responding to just the road now, because I suppose the utilities have to go through there. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I would assume that the storm drainage - we would have to provide some kind of outlet to this pond. The sanitary sewer could dead~end at that point and the watermain to dead-end, but I point out to you you're ending up with a watermain 10 . starting On Hamline and feeding this area and dead-ending. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: So Anlble Road is going to dead-end for some time. MR. ARTHUR ERICKSON: I was the first one in on Nursery Hill Lane and I watched that road go in and the utilities go in (inaudible) alongside of Mr. Tschida, and I'm asking Mr. Christoffersen - I'm a little concerned. I was under the im- pression that when the utilities went on Nursery Hill Lane, the dimensions were just to serve the existing lots and we were told at the time they wouldn't be able to handle any additional homes. I don't know - maybe I misconstrued the whole thing, but they weren't large mains or pipes that went in (inaudible) to handle the volume of homes you're considering, are you actually hooking on to Nursery Hill or the units that came in behind us from the other Karth Lake (inaudible) MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The units that came in behind you are are sanitary sewer - I ,think you're mistaking the sanitary sewer placed down at the end of Nursery Hill Lane - the eleva- tion was such that (inaudible) which occurred under the Karth Lake development. We needed a lift station which was con- structed at the intersection of Highway 96 and Lexington approxi- mately, and that force main comes back to Hamline so we could lower the sanitary sewer in this area here and provide sanitary sewer service to all of these areas. I do not particularly cherish the thought of a long dead-end water main. Six inch is an ample size to serve several homes (inaudible) several in Arden Hills (inaudible) 11 homes would be out of water, but if there were a break and this were not looped, there's a possibility of a great many more to be out of water. MR. ERICKSON: Or if you had a house fire on Lot 1 and two pumpers hooked up, we could'flush everybody's toilet for them. MR. CHRISTOFn:RSEN: If you were to hook up to this hydrant and pump from this point, if it was all on a dead-end it would make a difference. You're right, it's less than if we had a loop down from Anlble. If we had that, we have a feed from two directions. And I'm trying to encourage looping, and I think the Council is trying to encourage looping of most of the water system in the city. . FROM THE AUDIENCE: With this construction, would Nursery Hill have to put up again with the heavy equipment going up and down the street for two years? That's the only way to get in. They told us last year it wasn't going to (inaudible), but I noticed it there the next morning. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: This would have to be the last of it, I think. 11 . MR. MARCEL EIBENSTEINER, 1364 Rockstone Lane, New Brighton: I don't have a complete SOlution, but let's say we extend that street to the south property line and put up a barricade and work out an easement so we extend a storm sewer and sanitary sewer with just an easement, is that a possibility? Couldn't it be worked out on easements and barricade the road and when we have too much traffic we extend the road down Amble? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That's more acceptable than dead-ending at this point. COUNCILMAN HANSON: I'd like Don to react to that question about the quality of Amble Road handling traffic. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I can vaguely recall when watermain was placed in Amble Road and I questioned whether it was under the standard of construction of today for a permanent street. I guess I can't really answer whether it's a 5-ton or 3-ton load. Granted, it will receive more traffic. Generally the traffic that's really hard traffic on a street such as Amble Road is truck traffic, and that's true on any street and you will find break-up occurring or more likely to occur on Hamline because there's a lot of truck traffic on Hamline and very little truck traffic on a residential street. There is some, but compared to something like Hamline it's insignificant. MR. ARTHUR ERICKSON: I asked this question last year and I will ask it again. With the volume of traffic, the heavy equip-, ment and cars that are going to be going on Nursery Hill Lane to put in this development, and the development gets put in and all of a sudden Nursery Hill Lane is developed end the village engineer says it has to be resurfaced, are the home owners that are there now going to have to foot the bill again after we have already built the road once, or is there a possibility of the contractor having to resurface the road and put up a bond for it? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I'm not certain of the village policy. I can't recall on reconstruction of streets. I believe - is it a ten or twenty year period? . MRS. Me NIESH: Streets are usually on a ten year period - streets only. Street, sewer and water combination has been 20 years, but just a street improvement, those have generally been spread over a ten year period. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: In the immediate future is Nursery Hill going to have to be done again completely from scratch? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That's a difficult question. 12 . . ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: If you ever had to re-do it,. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I assume if it would be a 20-year time there would be another assessment - after a reasonable period of time after it was constructed. I think this is a matter of Council decision whether streets should be assessed or not assessed. The village has a regular maintenance pro- gram on streets - I believe it's every four years they patch and sealcoat, and that certainly is not assessed against the abutting property owners and it would be a matter of how bad the street would break up. I question whether or not Nursery Hill, with the amount of construction you might see going in would break up substantially because it's a good designed 7-ton street and it would take a lot of traffic, and I mean heavy traffic. MR. ERICKSON: We've had it. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Have you noticed any breakup on the street? MR. ERICKSON: Little cracks here and there - not big chunks. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The last time I drove through I didn't notice it. MR. ERICKSON: There's one spot by Compton which has settled six or eight inches along the curbline along with some other driveways that have been backed into by heavy equipment because they couldn't turn around on the end. Mr. Schultz's concrete driveway has been busted up on the end because the man couldn't turn around in the mud so he backed up his bulldozer and busted it, but they do pile up in there. It's improved' since they put in a wider cul-de-sac, but up until the middle of the summer it was pretty rough. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: I would assume if any connection went in to any road from Nursery Hill Court that would be used by a large amount of construction equipment. MR. ERICKSON: We presumed that the heavy equipment would be coming in from the development from behind my house (inaudible) MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I think in any portion of the village that's undeveloped the existing residential streets do provide the access to the undeveloped property and you can understand there isn't a Hamline Avenue or through street to each piece of property that's undeveloped, so to develop that area, primarily you have to use residential streets to get in and out and that's why we design residential streets as high as we do and for longevity also, but you have to gain access to the property sometimes through residential streets. It's inconvenient, I'm sure, but this isn't the only area where the Council has been faced with this problem. 13 . (Inaudible) contractors have to use residential streets to get into. We like to encourage the contractors to keep it to a minimum. MR. ERICKSON: Is there any set hours? Like, is it 6:00 o'clock in the morning to start the diesels and steam shovels? Is that part of the village policy that they can start that early, especially on a Saturday? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I don't know that the village has any policy or regulations covering contractors' operations. Historically contractors go to work as early as the farmers do and try to get in as many hours as they can because of the limited construction season, and this year was pretty wet in June and July. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: Never any more good construction seasons than a farmer has a good growing season. . MRS. DONNA MC CUNE, l315 Nursery Hill Lane: I'm for another exit too. That traffic and our children playing in the streets, I think would be too heavy, and I'd like to be on record as saying I want another exit off of this. MR. AMBLE: I'd like to say, we have children playing on our street, and we'd just as soon not have more traffic, and as long as we're getting picayune, whO'S going to absorb the losses I'm taking - roughly two lots and I'm being assessed $20,000. I'd like to know who's picking me up. I'm talking about $75,000. Anybody have any comment? , COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: Mr. Amble and your Honor, we have several times indicated to the developer that we needed another access and suggested that he work with you. His original pro- gram wouldn't (inaudible) and he has been working with us trying to find the best solution, but he indicated there were none you were interested in. There wasn't another solution that would give us the access and get to your land. MR. AMBLE: There wasn't anything that would really solve the problem. There was a proposed road that ran east and west on the north side of the woods. I'm sorry - I tried to talk to the neighbors and find a map showing this road. I think the remark I made the last time I was here was that I had visited previously with people on Nursery Lane and they thought when we built that it was a dead-end road, and all of a sudden it's no longer a dead-end road. This proposed road that ran east and west is no longer there and all these things disappear. I just don't like the proposal, no way. 14 COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: I guess if we went ahead with this proposal - doesn't this land lock your property? . MR. AMBLE: If you will give me an easement through this tax forfeited land so I can get to that end of it and I can use this easement on the east end of it - it's a kind of a mickey- mouse arrangement but I'll have to accept it, but I'd just as soon not have a road go through it. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: You'll still get three lots out of it. From my standpoint this' would be too long a cul-de-sac. We need another access. Apparently we can't get out to Hamline and there are some disadvantages to that so it appears if we want to develop this plat of land we have to get to Amble Road. This one appears to be the most practical, but as an individual COuncil member I dOn't like the thought of taking land from an individual who isn't ready to develop or plan or go in that direction, so I have a dilenuna and I don't know how to solve it. This appears to be the only solution that makes any sense unless Mr. Amble has another one that enables us to get through. ' MR. EIBENSTEINER: As far as the property is concerned, let's say we put a barricade on the south side of the property line - Mr. Amble gives the village an easement - 50 foot or 60 foot easement - we'd be inclined to go along with the idea. We'll put in storm sewer, water and sanitary sewer, and put a barricade on the south end of the property line. That way Mr. Amble has no assessment on his property. His 150 foot lot is an oversize lot - possibly it could be reduced to two 75-foot lots. That way he's not landlocked. His tax structure stays the same. We pay for the utilities without the street. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: You'd pay for the water and sewer to your property and leave the street construction out just south of Lots 14 and 11 MR. EIBENSTEINER: I would guess if we had the sewer and water we'd have the area pretty well built up a year from now but if the market goes (inaudible) it would take three years, and if there's too much traffic then the road would have to go through and Mr. Amble be assessed. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: But there are safety reasons there. . ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: I'll ask for comments from the audience before turning it back to the Council. COUNCILMAN HANSON: Mr. Amble mentioned a second easement. Could we have that on the map? Is that off to the left? MR. MILLER: It showed,there is a partial right-of-way at the far right. I think that's really mis-drawn, but there's some type of access easement set aside there. It's not a public easement. 15 . I ~ I f ~ ~ f [, " ! l f ! t ~ i' " ~. .' ~ ~ ~ ~ i~ . I) F. I: " " l:"' L-: ~ E' [ ,,' l:.~ ,.. ~ L_ COUNCIU1AN WINGERT: That's a private easement and it's a half street width so there would have to be an additional ease- ment if that was to be considered a legitimate easement. The other one is at the west, or about at the proposed road. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That would be right here. COUNCILMAN WINGERT: It occurs to me we still wind up with the same thing. We wind up kind of deciding there's a road at the point or that theJe's easements going through whioh probably (inaudible) a future road, and I guess I'm persuaded to support that position because I have none other to support. I think it's very important there are too many (inaudible) too long to serve with a single cul-de-sac road. I'm looking for a solution (inaudible) If the easement on the east was a workable easement as Mr. Miller showed us in alternative whatever it was, I think I'd jump on that one - that being a better solution - but I don't see one. So far in the testimony that I have heard tonight there's no other suggestion that there's any other solution to solve that particular problem. For lack of another, I support this one and, therefore, I oan't see the advantage of a half measure of not putting a street in. We lose the advantage of it and you still decided that's where it's going to go. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: Could this Council, and perhaps Mr. Popovich could tell us, if we go ahead with this one, at the assess- ment hearing could the Council deoide that the property through which it goes - Mr. Amble's presently unplanned for development property - should only be assessed at a future date and defer that portion of an assessment? MR. POPOVICH: You could defer it, but we're just talking about costs tonight, so at the assessment hearing you could levy all the assessments aoross the board as we normally have done, or that portion on the Amble,property yo~ could defer until some future time and then pick it up at that time if you wish to do it. We have not deferred because of the bookkeeping involved in trying to keep track of it, but legally you could. That deoision could be made at the assessment hearing. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: May I make one statement. I think the people (inaudible) you're alluding to another lot on this side. Let me put the original drawing back on. I just wanted to point out to the Council if this (inaudible) and assuming the property line ran through here over to where that would be placed it's a deep piece of property and there's no sanitary sewer and watermain and that would have to be brought in from this road because there are two lots over there and that also would have to be planned should Mr . Amble decide to develop that into more than one or two lots. COUNCILMAN CRICHTON: If we put that road through we will create two pieces of property for ~tt. Amble. Could that assessment at an assessment hearing time be deferred? I feel that we need an outlet and I have heard no other alternative either. That's why ! have been searching for others for several months and this 16 seems to be the most viable solution for it. . MR. JOHN SAURO, 466 Bayview Drive, Roseville: I have been counselling with Mr. Amble and I was wondering if the street was put there as proposed, now or at a future date, this piece of property being approximately 600 east and west and 132 running north and south, would the Council allow a variance to have the width of the lot facing the road to be 66 feet provided that would give Mr. Amble four lots on the road facing east and west (inaudible) providing that the square footages were accounted for? ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: You can't say what a Council would do, but it would be essentially unprecedented to divide a lot into lots that would be sub-standard. MR. SAURO: Being Mr. Amble has, like he pointed out before, a very good chance of losing a considerable amount of money, I think a variance should be considered here. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: How would the money be lost? You have now one parcel. That's one lot without any road going past. There's no way to legally subdivide it into more than one. So you have one now. With the road you have three lots. Two extra lots improved would be $30,000 - and I guess maybe more than that the way things go nowdays, so you'd be getting $30,000 and losing $20,000 and your net gain would be $10,000 and you're likely to be recompensed for the road going through. MR. SAURO: But he has room for five lots. . ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: But he has landlocked himself. I believe we had, the opportunity for statements, and I think it's time to talk up here. COUNCILMAN HANSON: I wouldn't mind talking on that as far as setting a precedent. The Council has said they welcome considera- tion of such a proposal but I think we have enough property there that we would welcome an opportunity to review such a development of the entire (inaudible) parcel, but we couldn't commit ourselves to what is acceptable. But I think you have some possibilities where you could put one driveway on a common property line and serve two lots and that sort of thing, and could maybe work out something. It would have to be well planned. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: I can't remember dividing a lot into sub-standard (inaudible) we have had minor variances. COUNCILMAN HANSON: I don't know if he'd have enough property to use some contrivance like a planned development. ACTING MAYOR WOODBURN: 'Possible - the 67 foot width lot. 17 , . COUNCILMAN CRICHTON:' It doesn't appear to be possible (inaudible) Councilman Wingert then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: Resolution No. ZIf- 7 S RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENT NO.SS-W-P-ST-78-3 UNDER AND PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 429 BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, that in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, 1961, Chapter 429, as amended, the Council held a public hearing on the proposed construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-78-3 consisting of the construction of sanitary sewer, watermain, bituminous paving, concrete curb and gutter, storm drainage facilities, right-of-way acquisition and necessary appurtenances in the area bounded by Hamline Avenue on the west, Nursery Hill Lane on the north, Karth Lake on the east, and vacated S.T.H. 51 on the south, as described in the Notice of Hearing at a cost presently estimated at $200,000.00, and sub- stantially in accordance with the preliminary report as to the feasibility thereof which is now on file in the office of the City Clerk Administrator; and having considered the views of all interested persons and ,being fully advised in the premises, the Council does hereby determine and order that said improve- ment shall be constructed and financed, and special assessments shall be levied therefor, pursuant to said Chapter 429, and that the area proposed to be assessed therefor shall include the property as described in the Notice of Hearing. The City Consulting Engineer is directed to prepare and submit to.the Council the final plans and specifications. The motion for the adoption o,f the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilman Hanson, and upon roll call vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: All; and the following voted against the same: None; whereupon said resolu- tion was declared duly passed and adopted. . ~ ~~~ ~~. !?~~ ~~ 18