Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCP 04-12-1993 AGENDA ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL MEETING . MOUNDS VIEW HIGH SCHOOL CAFETERIA MONDAY, APRIL 12, 1993, 7:30 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDERJROLL CALL 7:30 P.M. 7:31 PM 2. AGENDA ADOPTION 7:31 PM 3. PUBLIC HEARING - 1993 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NOTICE 8:15 PM 4. PUBLIC HEARING - REVISED ORDINANCE TO ZONING REGULATIONS AND USE OF SIGNS 9:00 PM 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MEETING OF MARCH 29, 1993 9:01 PM 6. CONSENT CALENDAR a, Approve Resolutuion #93-23 - Class B - Pull Tab Premises Permit (Renewal) ABWA Roseville, Chapter Lady Slipper at Flaherty's Arden Bowl, 1273 West County Road E, (pending approval from Ramsey Co. Sheriff) b. Approve List of Claims/Payroll. . 9:02 PM 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS 9:03 PM 7. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. Planning: Commission Recommendation: Approval of Case #93-01; Rezoning, Amended PUD & Final General Development Plan, Edgewater Estates, 3rd Addition. B. 1993 Pavement Management: * Resolution #93-24 - Ordering the Improvement in the Matter of the 1993 Pavement Maintenance Improvement. * Resolution #93-25 - Determining Assessed Cost of Improvement, Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessment Roll and Setting the Assessment Hearing Date in the Matter of The 1993 Pavement Maintenance Improvememt. * Resolution #93-26 - Establishing the Assessment Rates for Bituminous Overlay Projects. * Optional Consideration of Resolution #93-27 - Accepting Bid and Authorizing Execution of Contract in the Matter of 1993 Pavement Maintenance Improvement. C. Approve Ordinance #291 - Adopting Revised Zoning Regulations. Approve Ordinance #292 - Adopting Revised Sign Regulations, . 9:05 PM 8. COUNCIL COMMENTS . 9:10 PM 9. ADJOURN CITY OF ARDEN HILIB MEKIU\NDtlM . TO: MlrnR AND CITY Cll:lVN:::IL FRQ(: 0CIl0l'HY A. PERSCIi', CITY ~ twrE: APRIL 9, 1993 stlBJlOC:T: CITY AIHlJII8'l'RMQt' S IllFCIlMM'ICN FOR Cll:lVN:::IL MEIi:J.'DG OF 4/12/93 l. Public Hearing - 1993 Pavement Maintenance f= the Assessment Rate - '!he assessment rate is shown at $2.98 arrl there is additional information in the Resolutions attache:i. '!hese Resolutions are nonnally not approve:i until the portion on the agerrla urrler Unfinished and New Business is conducted, arrl infonnation given to the citizens arrl questions answere:i. Contained in these Resolutions is also hearing dates being set for May 10, 1993 f= the actual assessment itself, with the additional approval by resolution of the low bid which includes all contractors arrl bids subnitted and which has been reviewe:i arrl approve:l. by the City Engineer. 2. Public Hearing - Zoning ordinance arrl Sign Regulation Hearing - Again these Resolutions are attache:i which are normally contained within the Unfinished arrl New Business portion of the agerrla. Additional to these Resolutions you will find a summary of the changes recommended f= the hearing. Planning Commission is additionally recorrunending changes minor . in nature referrin:! to the 728 square feet maxllnum for accessory - structures, rather than the 700 square feet which will be further ~lained by Planner Bergly. 3. Consent calerrlar: '!he Pull-tab premise permit application renewal is requested f= approval Class B ABWA Roseville O1apter, lady slipper at Flaherty's Arden BcMl per Resolution, pending approval of Ramsey County Sheriff. 4. Unfinishe:i arrl New Business - Planning Carmnission Recommendation: It is recanunende:i that the Council waive the development moratorium arrl approve case #93-01, Rezoning frOlll R-1 to R-3 District, Amende:i PUD, arrl Final General Development Plan for Two Additional Townhouse Units, Fdgewater Estates 'Ihird Addition, based on the rationale as listed in the Planner's Report dated 4-7-93 arrl conditione:i upon: l. Suhnission of the amendment to the Fdgewater Estates Townhouse Ass=iation By-laws which clearly defines the Association's responsibility for maintaining or replacin:!landscaping in the drainage arrl utility easements if the City is require:i to perform utility maintenance work within the easement which results in damage to the landscaping, arrl approval of such amendment by the City Atto:rney. 2. '!he applicant utilize the erosion control methods outline:i by the Plannin:! Conunission to stabilize soils within 72 hours of campletion of final gradin:J of the site. Council should further instruct the City Attorney to draft the appropriate ordinance for Rezoning of this parcel of larrl. . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MlNNESOfA RESOLUTION 93- 24 A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT IN THE MATIER OF THE 1993 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, a public hearing relating to the 1993 P.ivement Maintenance Improvement was held before the Arden Hills City Council after ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given; and WHEREAS the City Council has duly considered the Feasibility Report and those matters presented at the public hearing by those persons desiring to be heard on the matter; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota: 1. The 1993 Pavement Maintenance Improvement is hereby ordered as recommended in the . revised Feasibility Report dated March 5, 1993. Passed and adopted this 12th day of April, 1993. Thomas R. Sather, Mayor ATIEST: Dorothy A. Person, City Administrator . 039-0801.apr CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA . RESOLUTION 93 - ~ A RESOLUTION DETERMINING ASSESSED COST OF IMPROVEMENT, ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL AND SETIING THE ASSESSMENT BEARING DATE IN THE MATTER OF niE 1993 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, costs have been detennined for the 1993 Pavement Maintenance Improvement consisting of a contract price of $213,131.20 and expenses incurred or to be incurred by the City in the making of the improvement in the amount of $44,437.00 for a total cost of the improvement of $257,568.20. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council for the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota: 1. Based upon the City Assessment Policies, it is determined that the portion of this improvement to be paid by the City and not assessed to benefitted properties is $136,878.20. 2. The portion of the cost to be assessed against benefitted properties pursuant to the City of Arden Hills Assessment Policies shall be $120,690.00. 3. The assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments and shall extend over a period of three . years for assessments less than $500 and five years for assessments equal to or greater than $500; the first of the installments to be payable on or before December 31, 1993, with interest at the rate of 8.00% per annum from the date of the adoption of the assessment resolution. 4. The City Administrator with the assistance of the Project Engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall have available to the City Administrator's office a copy of the proposed assessment roll for public inspection. 5. An assessment hearing shall be held before the City Council on the proposed assessments on the 10th day of May, 1993, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. at Arden Hills City Hall. 6. The City Administrator shall provide ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the assessment hearing as required by law. Passed and adopted this 12th day of April, 1993. ATTEST: Thomas R. Sather, Mayor . Dorothy A. Person, City Administrator OJ9-OlI01.apr CITY OF ARDEN H1T.T -~ RAMSEY COUNTY, MlNNESOI'A . RESOLUTION 93 - ~ A RESOLUTION ESTABUSIDNG THE ASSESSMENT RATES FOR BITUMINOUS OVERLAY PROJECIS WHEREAS, the City has adopted an Assessment Manual, dated November 13, 1990, which requires the City Council, from time to time, to establish assessment rates for bituminous overlay improvements; and, WHEREAS, the assessment rates for 1993 have not been established; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota: l. The assessment rate for bituminous overlay improvements shall be $2.98 per front foot for residentially zoned property. 2. The assessment rate for bituminous overlay improvements for townhouses served by Arden View Drive and Arden Vrew Court shall be $63.78 per unit. . Passed and adopted this 12th day of April, 1993. Thomas R. Sather, Mayor ATI'EST: Dorothy A. Person, City Administrator . 039-080Lqr OPTXONAL CONSXDERATXON AT APRXL 12, 1993 COUNCXL MEETXNG CXTY OF ARDEN HXLLS . RAMSEY COUNTY, MXNNESOTA RESOLUTXON NO. 93-27 A RESOLUTXON ACCEPTXNG BXD AND AUTHORXZXNG EXECUTXON OF CONTRACT XN THE MATTER OF 1993 PAVEMENT MAXNTENANCE XMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 93-18, competitive bids were solicited and received for the 1993 Pavement Maintenance Improvement as set forth in the bid tabulation attached thereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the city Council has considered the amount of the bids and the responsibility of the bidders and determined that T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. , is the lowest responsible bidder; WHEREAS, the following list of contractors and their bids were received by the City of Arden Hills on April 6, 1993: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. $213,131.20 Valley Paving, Inc. 214,918.95 Bituminous Consulting & Contracting 217,238.25 . Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 217,766.70 Bituminous Roadways, Inc. 228,794.10 Tower Asphalt, Inc. 229,503.90 GMH Asphalt, Inc. 236,249.80 Buch Blacktop, Inc. 243,927.95 Midwest Asphalt, Inc. 248,942.60 W.B. Miller, Inc. 258,401.20 Hardrives, Inc. 258,960.40 Ashbach Construction, Inc. 264,583.65 Driveway Design, Inc. 292,536.50 NOW, THEREFORE, BE XT RESOLVED by the city Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota: 1. The Mayor and City Administrator are authorized and directed to execute, on behalf of the City, such contract with T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. , as is approved by the City Attorney for the completion of the 1993 Pavement Maintenance Improvement according to the approved plans and specifications designated in Resolution 93-18. 2. The City Administrator is authorized and directed to forthwith return to all bidders the deposits made with their bids upon execution of the contract above specified. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CXTY COUNCXL OF THE CXTY OF ARDEN . HXLLS THXS 10TH DAY OF MAY, 1993. THOMAS R. SATHER, MAYOR ATTEST: DOROTHY A. PERSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR . STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS ORDINANCE SUMMARY AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING REVISED ZONING REGULATIONS. On April 12, 1993, the Arden Hills City Council approved Ordinance No. 291 which adds Appendix C to the Arden Hills Municipal Code relating to Zoning Regulations. The City Council, by an affirmative vote of at least four Council Members directed that a Summary of Appondix C, as adopted by Ordinance No. 291, be publi.shed in the City's official newspaper and that a printed copy of Appendix C, as adopted by Ordinance No. 291, be posted on the City's bulletin board and otherwise be made available for inspection at the City Offices during regUlar business hours. Appendix C, as adopted by Ordinance No. 291, contains the following sections: Section I. Title, Purpose and Intent. This section describes the purpose and intent of the Zoning Regulations. Section II. Rules, Scope, Interpretation, and Definitions. This section contains rules of construction, interpretation and definitions for the Zoning Regulations. . Section III. Minimum Ordinance Compliance. This section contains a statement of required compliance with minimum proviSions of the code. Section IV. Zoning Map and Boundaries of Zoning Districts. This section references the official zoning map for the City of Arden Hills and contains rules regarding zoning boundaries. Appendix C does not rezone any property in the City of Arden Hills. Section V. District Provisions. This section contains specific r'!gulations relating to development of property within various zoning districts of the City. Section VI. General Regulations. This section contains provisions relating generally to all development within the City. Section VII. Special Uses. This section contains. criteria for allowing special uses within certain zoning districts. Section VIII. Administration and Procedures. This section contains regulations relating to a public hearing and prOcedures for the issuance of various development permits. . Section IX. Nonconforminq Uses, Buildinqs and Lots. This . section contains regulations which apply to uses that were permi ttee but have become nonconforming because of a change in development regulations and ineicate the manna. in which such property can be maintained. Section X. Special Provisions. This section contains regulations relating to mobile home parks, swimming pools, mining, soil processing, land reclamation, signs, massage, sauna and wrap parlors. Section XI. Building Permits and Certificates of Occupancy. This section describes procedures for the issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy. Section XII. Enforcement. This section provides regulations as to the administration of the zoning code, payment of various fees and indicates that all violations of the zoning code shall be treated as misdemeanors. Section XIII. Effectuation. This section includes a prOvision which indicates that each provision of the code shall be viewed separately. Bffective Date. Ordinance No. 291 shall become effective the day following publication of this Ordinance Summary. . b/ord/AHOl\D12 . STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY .. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS ORDINANCE NO. 291 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING REVISED ZONING REGULATIONS. The Arden Hills City Council ordains that Appendix C is hereby added to the Arden Hills Municipal Code. Appendix C shall consist of the Table of Contents, Sections I through XII, inCluding their respective subdiVisions; and Section XIII, Subd. A as contained in that certain zoning ordinance draft prepared by Sanders, Wacker, Wehrman, Rergley, Inc., dated MarCh 8, 1993, subject to the following amendments: l. Redacting for tYPographical, numbering and/or reference errora which changes can be mado by administrative staff prior to final printing. 2. Reserved for any additions by Council at April 12, 1993 meeting. The Arden Hills City Council ordains that Appendix A of the Arden Hills Municipal Code is hereby repealed. . Effective Date. Ordinance No. 291 shall become effective on the day fOllowing publication of the Ordinance or an approved Ordinance Summary. Adoption Date. Passed by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills the day of , 1993. Thomas Sather, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy Person, City Administrator . , STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS ORDINANCE SUMMARY AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO USE OF SIGNS. On April 12, 1993, the Arden Hills City Council approved Ordinance No. 292 which adds Appendix D to the Arden Hills Municipal COde relating to the use of signs within the City. The City Council, by an affirmative vote of at least four council members, directed that a Summary of Appendix D, as adopted by Ordinance No. 292, be published in the City's official newspaper and that a printed copy of Appendix 0, as adopted by Ordinance No. 292, be posted on the City's bulletin board and otherwise be made available for inspection at the City's Offices during regular business hours. Appendix 0, as adopted by Ordinance No. 292, contains the following provisions. Section I. '1'itle. Section II. Purpose and Intent. Section III. Separability. This section indicates that each . provision of the Sign Ordinance shall be viewed separate from other provisions. Section IV. Rules and Definitions. This section contains rules of interpretation and definitions for terms in the Sign Ordinance. Section V. General Siqn Regulations. This section contains regulations Which are applicable to all signs within the City. Section VI. SpeCial Sign District and Regulations. This section contains speCific provisions for service station signs; multiple occupancy business and industrial structures, Shopping centers, office and industrial parks and planned unit development signs; County Road E Business District signs; B-4, I-Flex, GB Districts and institutional campus signs; and Highway Advertising District signs. Section VII. Schedule of District Provisions. This section contains a chart summarizing sign regulations for various districts. Section VIII. Construction, Maintenance and Inspection. . . Section IX. Administration, Compliance and Enforcement. This . section contains regulations relating to nonconforming signs, violations, removal of signs by City Administrator, penalties for violation of sign regulations, appeal provisions, variance provisions, and special use permits for s1gns. Effective Date. Ordinance No. 292 shall become effective the day following publication of this Ordinance Summary. b/ord/AIIORDl3 . . . . STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS 292 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO USE OF SIGNS. The Aroen Hills Ci'ty Council ordains -I:ha-l: Appendix D is hereby added -1:0 the Arden Hills Municipal Code. Appendix D shall consists of Sections I through IX, including their respective subdivisions, as contained in the Sign Ordinance Draft prepared by Sanders, Wacker, Wehrman and Bergley, Inc., dated March 8, 1993, subject to the following amendments: 1. Redacting for typographical, numbering and/or reference errors which changes can be made by administrative staff prior to final printing. 2. Reserved for any additions by Council at April 12, 1993 meeting. The Arden Rills City Council ordains ~ha~ Chap~er 21 of the Arden Hills Municipal Code is hereby repealed. Effective Date. Ordinance No. 292 shall become effective on the . day fOllowing publication of the Ordinance or an approved Ordinance Summary. Adoption Date. Passed by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills tha day of , 1993. Thomas Sather, Mayor . ATTF:S'T': Dorothy Person, City Administrator . , , . MINUTES CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 29, 1993 7:30 P.M. - Mounds View Senior High School CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Sather called to order the regular City Council meeting at 7:32 p.m. Present: Mayor Thomas Sather; councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski, Dale Hicks, Paul Malone, Dennis Probst. Also present were: City Engineer, Terry Maurer; Public Works Superintendent, Dan Winkel; Clerk Administrator, Dorothy Person; Community Planning Coordinator, catherine Iago; City Accountant, Terry Post; Recording Secretary, Shar Foster. ADOPT AGENDA Note was made that a revised agenda was printed on March 29, 1993. Because citizens were still joining the meeting, Council agreed to move agenda item "Informational Meeting For Residents" to after "Approval of Minutes" and "Consent Calendar". . MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to adopt the revised March 29, 1993 agenda with the change of order noted above. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES Councilmember Probst asked that the first sentence of the third complete paragraph on page four of the March 8, 1993 Council minutes be revised to read: "Councilmember Probst said that one of the impediments to the development of the Gateway Business District is improving vehicular access, and there is a goal to "dress up" the roadway. " Councilmember Hicks asked that the final paragraph of page five be revised to read: "Councilmember Hicks said the intent of his motion is for the City Planner and the applicant to work together on developing a landscape plan for this portion of the development that will be a part of and coordinate with the concept landscape plan for the future development. " MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Probst, to approve the minutes of the March 8, 1993 Regular Council Meeting with the two revisions noted above, Motion carried . unanimously (5-0) . - -----~--- ---------- ------~- , Al:den Hills Counci I 2 Mal:ch 29, 1993 . CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Hicks moved, seconded by Aplikowski, to appl:ove the Consent calendal: and authol:ize execution of all necessal:Y documents contained thel:ein. Motion cal:l:ied unanimously (5-0). a. Adopt Resolution No. 93-19, Relating to Appol:tionment of Assessments Relating to Impl:ovement No. ST-81-2. b. Appl:ove Resolution No. 93-20, Bingo Hall License Application (Pot-O'Gold) fl:om Goldie K. Siedow. c, Adopt Resolution No. 93-22, Relating to Appol:tionment of Assessments Relating to Impl:ovement No. W-78-5. d. Appl:ove Assignment of Ol:dinance #290 fOl: SUl:face Watel: Utility. e . ApPl:ove 1993 Business Licenses. f. Appl:ove List of Claims/Payroll. INFORMATIONAL MEETING FOR RESIDENTS REGARDING . T.H. 51 & SNELLING AVENUE Tom O'Keefe, MNDOT Planning Division and Gal:Y Thompson, MNDOT Tl:affic Division wel:e intl:oduced. O'Keefe stated that aftel: five fatalities and thl:ee sevel:e injudes in 5,5 years at that location, MNDOT decided last yeal: to cl ose the T.H. SI/Snelling Avenue intel:section in ol:del: to allow MNDOT time to l:eview the matter. He added that MNDOT and the City have had continued discussions regal:ding the closul:e since shortly aftel:, O'Keefe repol:ted that the intel:section had a volume of apPl:oximately 1,200 vehicles pel: day, which is vel:Y high fOl: an unsignalized intel:section. He added that the tl:affic count fOl: County Road E has only increased 40 vehicles per day since the Snelling/51 intersection was cl osed, He said MNDOT has evaluated the situation surl:ounding the .Snelling/51 intel:section to detel:mine what options were available and the viability of those options, He stated that MNDOT's Planning Section l:epol:ted to the City last November that the following altel:natives would be considel:ed fOl: fUl:ther study (in order of MNDOT pl:efel:ence): . ---------------- . Arden Hills Council 3 March 29, 1993 Option 1: No change - intersection would remain closed permanently Rationale for this option would be that it is the safest and least expensive, and turning movements would be eliminated. The effects would be a decrease of mobil ity; traffic, safety and pollution concerns would "move elsewhere". Option 2 : Build frontage road between Old Snelling and Lydia Avenue on the west side of T.H. 51 This option is thought to be nearly as safe as closing the intersection, and it eliminates turning movements at Snelling/51; however, it would be very expensive and traffic, safety and pollution concerns would. "move" to the Lydia Avenue intersection, mobility would be improved for some users and worsened for other users, Option 3: Snelling/51 intersection would remain closed and the County Road E Bridge would be widened to accommodate higher levels of traffic using County Road E as an alternate route . This option would be very expensive and would nattractU more traffic to County Road E. Traffic counts on County Road E have not raised significantly since closure of the Snell ing/51 intersection, therefore, MNDOT does not believe bridge widening is warranted. If this option were chosen, the project would have to compete for funding. Option 4 : Redesign, signalization and reopening of Snelling/51 intersection This option would improve mobility, but it would be very expensive, it is expected it would be less safe than the unsignalized intersection which existed in the past, and it would slow "through" traffic in the area. O'Keefe stated that MNDOT's Planning Section and Traffic Section have recently met to determine which of the four alternatives under study are actually possible. He added that MNDOT's current position is that Option 4 has been found to be an unacceptable option unless nearby local streets are proven to have substantially higher safety concerns as a res u 1 t of keeping the Snelling/51 intersection closed. . O'Keefe said he admires the activism of the Arden Hills community in trying to resolve this issue, ---------- Arden Hills Counci I 4 March 29, 1993 . Mayor sather explained that the procedure to be used for receiving public would be that all persons who signed the guest register would be invited to speak; he asked that each speaker limit comments to two minutes per person, Names were called in the order listed on the guest register. Comments made by citizens are as follows (not verbatim) : Ray McGraw, 1427 Bussard Court: These hearings have been going on over a year, and the State has an obligation to provide access to property, Closure of the Snelling/51 intersection has created difficulty accessing property and has added time to emergency response, Jean Lemberg, 1401 Skiles Lane: It is surprising that the State thinks signalized intersections are less safe than unsignalized intersections, yet they install so may signals. When T.H. 51 originally came through, the old Snelling access was not closed because it was the only direct access. Access now that the Snelling/51 intersection is closed is very difficult. Convenience is not the only element; safety is also very important, The Lydia/Snelling intersection has worse sightlines than a redesigned intersection at . Snelling/51 would have. FeU tions from citizens have demonstrated the community's desire to reopen a safer intersection at Snelling/5l. Though the old intersection at Snelling/51 was unsafe! the gory details of past accidents have colored this issue. Accidents at the old intersection were not necessarily attributed to the design of the intersection, but probably to a large extent due to the high speed 1 imit of T,H. 51 and other factors, Roads cannot be closed simply because accidents occur. We desire safety as well as access, The County Road E bridge over T.R, 51 is inadequate to accommodate the traffic that is now using it. If we make no change now, this matter will surface again when changes to the Snelling/694 interchange are considered. Ken Schacht, 1683 West County Road F: I can't see a good solution, but closing the Snelling/51 intersection is not the answer, Residents along County Road E now have the burden of the "moved" traffic. My daughter experienced a near acr.ident at the Snelling/51 intersection, but I think opening the intersection with a signal seems appropriate, With regard to MNDOT's concern that a signalized intersection would impede "through" traffic, it must be considered that there are several signals between Snelling/51 and Rosedale; also, a signal would help to slow the high rate of speed along 5l. . . 1\rden Hills Council 5 March 29, 1993 Brad Lemberg, 1401 Skiles Lane: I've lived at my residence for 27 years and through my experiences I believe the present situation is very unsafe. The area of Snelling/51 is now an urban area and cannot be treated as a country road. I can't believe the County Road E traffic counts reported by MNDOT are accurate. Accidents or near accidents at County Road E are commonplace. Traffic on Lake Johanna Boulevard is also now being affected. Problems have just been moved elsewhere, Signalization with turn detection is warranted at Snelling/51, Intersections don't kill people - drivers kill people. Leon Hass, 1420 West County Road D: I've heard good arguments from both sides, but I am most concerned about the poor manner in which this matter is being handled. If the Traffic Section of MNDOT has now concluded that a redesigned, signalized intersection at Snelling/51 is not a viable alternative, why is there no one here tonight from the Traffic Section to answer our questions when this issue has been under scrutiny so long. I urge the Council to listen to the citizens and let them govern the outcome of this matter. MNDOT has made themselves look like fools. . Rhoda Behr, 1401 West County Road E: In 1966, when County Road E was widened, my driveway was made very steep, and as a result, I am forced to access my home from only one direction for safety's sake, There have been many near accidents for vehicles and pedestrians on County Road E, Pauline Hass, 1420 West County Road E: I am disillusioned by how the system, both MNDOT and the City Council, has failed. No one wants an unsafe intersection, we just want a safe alternative. Redesign of the Snelling/51 intersection has been done before when MNDOT thought they had a plan for an improved situation, yet now the "improved model" ~s deemed unsafe by MNDOT. MNDOT does not seem to know what they are doing in this instance. I hope the Council will take a stand very soon, Also, I would like to see the sign that reads "Use County Road En removed as it only encourages higher traffic levels on County Road E, Jim Schroedl, 1450 Skiles Avenue: For 30+ years I've lived in the area. Being in the insurance business I understand concerns for safety, I believe closure of the Snelling/51 intersection is a good step from a safety standpoint, and I think the community should accept the situation as is because it is safer, . Arden Hills Council 6 Mardl29, 1993 . Joe Kahnke, 1541 Edgewater Avenue: I see no alternative other than a signalized intersection. Accidents occur at all intersections, but we cannot close all intersections to be "safer", Rolf Engel, 3265 North Snelling Avenue: I suggest a fifth option, that being the Snelling/51 intersection remain closed except to emergency vehicles. closure of the Snelling/51 intersection adds about four minutes to a trip from my home. This four minutes could be crucial in an emergency. The option of a frontage road is better than leaving the situation as is. Linda Swanson, 1124 Ingerson Road: I have provided my comments, in wri ting, several times to the Council since this issue arose, Counci 1 needs to consider the entire community, safety, convenience, costs, etc. I have actually gone to MNDOT offices and reviewed their file on this matter. Since the 1970s, the State and County have recommended against signalization at the Snelling/51 location due to safety concerns. We pay MNDOT to know how to deal with these types of issues and some people are . ignoring that fact. There is a lot of talk tonight about convenience, but sometimes people have to learn to deal with change, The only reason to reopen the intersection appears to be convenience; convenience is no reason to ignore safety, Terry Hoxmeier, 3320 Lametti Circle: I'm opposed to reopening the Snelling/51 intersection using any of the alternatives because of safety concerns and the costs to implement changes, I applaud MNDOT for taking a firm stand, The costs involved are extreme and we need to be very careful in spending taxpayer's money, There is clearly no consensus on this issue. Many of the people who would receive the benefit of convenience if the intersection were reopened are opposed to reopening, Mary Remmers, 3160 Ridgewood Road: If traffic corning from 694 and from Rosedale would simply travel at a lower speed, the situation would be much safer for the enti.re stretch of T,H, 5l. The speed 1 imit is not only too high, it also needs improved enforcement. Barb Ernst, 3521 North Snelling Avenue: I have recently moved to the community and think it is important for citizens to ' , that the entire metro area has had to rea.LlZe accommodate growth. No" T.H. 51 is a freeway. The idea of . allowing emergency vehicles only to use the Snelling/51 intersection is a good idea. Also, the frontage road t' op_lon . Ard!=n Hills Council 7 March 29, 1993 is OK. Convenience is the leas t of my concerns, Safety is of the utmost importance; the speed of T.H. 51 needs to be lowered or at least enforced. Steve Lambros, 1373 Skiles Lane: I am new to the community and was interested in hearing all the angles of this issue before commenting, MNDOT's goal is supposedly mobility, yet they have reduced mobility be closing the Snelling/51 intersection. I wonder where the 1,200 vehicles per day that previously used the Snelling/51 intersection have gone since MNDOT claims that County Road E is not more highly traveled than before. Have those vehicles just vanished? The added miles to access our homes does not seem significant until you consider the number of people affected, times the number of trips, times the number of mil es, When you consider the grand total of all additional mil es traveled, the additional fuel used, and the additional pollution, it is very significant. I would like to see the Snelling/51 intersection reopened in a safer design and also the speed limit of T,H, 51 reduced. I understand the complexity of this issue and the emotions that are involved, but it is time that a position is taken and something is . actually done to bring the entire matter to a close. Mayor Sather invited comments from anyone who had not yet spoken; no further speakers came forward, In response to comments from citizens to the effect that the Council has not been responsive in this issue, Mayor Sather explained that the Counci 1 did take action to suggest that MNDOT evaluate the Snelling/51 intersection, then Counci 1 accepted the closure of the intersection, and now Council is responding to the request of citizens to revisit the issue. Regarding the idea of keeping the intersection closed except to emergency vehicles, he questioned whether it would be possible to monitor and enforce that type of arrangement. counci1member Ap1ikowski stated that she is very disturbed that MNDOT has now taken the position that a redesigned, signalized intersection is not a viable alternative. She recalled that in the late 1970 s or early 1980s, the City apparently had the option of a signal at Snelling/51, but that option .was turned down and a signal was located at Lydia/51 instead, She stated that her concern is safety, not convenience, and one large factor to the safety issue is the matter of the high rate of speed on T.H. 51. . _.._~- Arden Hills Council 8 March 29, 1993 . Councilmember Hicks asked O'Keefe what would likely occur if the City requested MNDOT reconsider the signalization option. O'Keefe responded saying that the decision that a signalized intersection is not a viable option was made at a high level in MNDOT, and though there may be political and I ega I routes to pursue if the City so desires, he did not believe MNDOT would reconsider the signalization option, Councilmember Hicks asked if there are any other intersections under MNDOT's jurisdiction that are still open after accidents have occurred. Thompson stated that the decision to install signals is usually based on certain "warrants"j and in the case of the Snelling/51 intersection, MNDOT decided that closure was the safest alternative. Councilmember Hicks stated that the option of a frontage road between Old Snelling and Lydia seems unreasonable and perhaps a frontage road from old Snelling to Glenhill would be a better idea. O'Keefe reiterated that a frontage road would have a high volume of traffic, safety concerns, and wetland concerns. Councilmember Malone asked if MNDOT has applied the same . objective criteria in making a decision on the Snelling/51 matter as has been applied to comparable intersections in the state, O'Keefe and Thompson said they believe the usual criteria has been applied and they would be willing to provide examples if requested, Malone said he would like that assurance, Councilmember Malone asked, presuming the Snelling/51 intersection remains closed, if MNDOT would consider revisiting the matter if the traffic situation on County Road E or other alternate routes becomes intolerable. O'Keefe said reconsideration under those conditions lS possible. Councilmember Probst expressed his opposition to the frontage road option based on his opinion that it would not be in the best interest of the City. He added that the signalized intersection option appeared to be the best option, but given that MNDOT's current position is that a signalized intersection is not a viable option, the next best available .' appears to be to keep the intersection OpL.1On closed. He further stated that regardless of the action taken with respect to the Snelling/51 intersection, the County Road E/Snelling intersection definitely needs attention. . ------------ . Arden Hills Council 9 March 29, 1993 MOTION: Probst moved, seconded by Malone, to accept MNDOT's recommendation that the Snelling/51 intersection remain closed, and to request that MNDOT actively keep the City fully advised as to future plans or proposals for T.H. 51 both at the 694 and the County Road E intersections. The following discussion took place prior to the vote. Councilmember Malone asked if the intent of this motion is to bring this matter to a cl os e , Councilmember Probst answered yes, that there does not appear to be any other alternatives given MNDOT's position. Councilmember Hicks advised the audience that if the motion on the floor passes, he is prepared to make another motion with regard to other safety concerns at County Road E. Brad Lemberg said that having been a City Engineer . himself, he would urge Council to pursue answers to the questions "what has MNDOT's study actually included?", "To where did 1,200 vehicles per day that previously used Snelling/51 go?", "who at MNDOT is ultimately responsible to make decisions regarding this issue and why are those persons not in attendance tonight?" and "What warrants and criteria were the basis for MNDOT's position?", Motion carried (3-2; Probst, Malone, Sather voted aye; Aplikowski, Hicks voted nay). Councilmember Hicks reiterated his frustration with MNDOT's position because it essentially "ties the City's hands". He commented that the issue involves not only access to the immediate neighborhood but also reasonable accessibility throughout the City. He added that he does not believe the frontage road option is acceptable, and he is concerned that problems and hazards have simply been "moved" from the Snelling/51 intersection to other routes, With regard to the idea of widening the County Road E bridge, he stated his belief that the cost would be prohibitive, MOTION: Hicks moved, seconded by Aplikowski, to take the following actions to alleviate safety concerns in the County Road E/T,H, 51 area: . --------------- Arden Hills Council 10 March 29, 1993 . - Request that Ramsey County restripe County Road E to create two lanes west of T.H. 51 to Old Snelling, - Request that a right turn lane be installed for eastbound traffic and a left turn lane for westbound traffic at the County Road E semaphore immediately west of the bridge over T.H. 51, and - Revisit the speed limit issue to pursue a reduction in speed limit to 30 mph in the area of the County Road E/T.H. 51 intersection, and - Request Ramsey County install a bikeway/walkway along the County Road E bridge over T.H, 5l. The following discussion took place prior to the vote. Councilmember Hicks stated that he realized the motion offered is a "band-aid approach" to the safety issues, but there did not appear to be any other alternative. Councilmember Malone asked if there is adequate . right-of-way for a bikeway/walkway along the bridge. City Engineer Maurer stated that he believed so, but would investigate. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. Mayor Sather called a short recess as the audience dispersed. After a few minutes, the regular meeting reconvened. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS FERNWOOD AVENUE WATER TOWER ADOPT RESOLUTION ORDERING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS & SOLICITATION OF BIDS Mayor Sather asked if Council had any questions of the City Engineer with regard to the Fernwood Avenue water tower interior repairs, sandblasting and painting (with exterior painting as an option), or proposed Resolution No. 93-21. Council had no questions. . . . Arden Hills CouIl:::il 11 Mar-ch 29, 1993 MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to adopt Resolution No, 93-21 Ordering Preparation of Plans and Specifications and Solicitation of Competitive Bids for the Repair, Refurbishing and Repainting of the Fernwood Avenue Water Tower. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). FINANCING PLAN FOR WATER TOWER FUND Administrator Person distributed to Council a memorandum and recommendation from City Accountant Post regarding the development of a financing plan to fund the north water tower- maintenance project, Post's memo recalled that in 1988 the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund (PIR) provided funding for the $800,000 improvement project to construct the south water tower. Post's recommendation called for consolidating the remaining $136,035 obligation from the 1988 construction of the south water tower with the $300,775 obligation for the north water tower maintenance project to arrive at a total principal obligation of $468,870 in the Permanent Improvement . Revolving Fund (PIR), Post explained that the financing arrangement he has recommended assumes a 6% interest rate with payments made quarterly from the Water Fund, commencing with the third quarter of 1993. Under his recommendation, both obligations would be satisfied by June 30, 2002. Councilmember Malone and Post discussed the matter of interest rate, Post stated that he used a 6% interest rate in his calculations because that is the approximate rate the City would face if borrowing the funds through other sources. Malone expressed concern that establishing a 6% interest rate would be fair in today's market, but perhaps would result in "lost opportunity" toward the end of the term. He asked '~ '. would be possible to establish a f 1 oa,t in; rate, 1 " 1 '. perhaps the prime rate plus three. Post said that would be workable, MOTION: Ma.lone moved I seconded by Probst, to ratify the City Accountant's financing plan for the north water tower project, whereby $300,775 is to be borrowed from the PIR Fund and consolidated with the remaining obligation from the south water tower project, The obligation is to be repaid in quarterly payments to the PIR Fund from the Hater Fund at an interest rate of prime rate plus . three (rate to be amended annually), Motion carried unanimously (5-0). ------ Arden Hills Council 12 March 29, 1993 . REVIEW TIF INFORMATION FOR "COTTAGES LIFESTYLES" Administrator Person distributed to Council documents and information provided by financial consultants, Ehlers and Associates, with regard to Tax Increment Financing (TIF) arrangements being considered for John Arkell's "The Cottages" development. The handouts included: - A Preliminary Draft of the Modified Development Program for Development District No. 1 Including Tax Increment Financing plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1 - No, 2 (approved by the City Council June 25, 1989) and Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 (under consideration) - A Preliminary Draft of Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No, 3 ("Cottages Lifestyles") - A Tax Increment Financing Procedure Referring to the Tax Increment Financing Procedure outline, Person reported that the step of calling a public hearing . has been accomplished, the hearing set for April 26, 1993. She further reported that the step of delivering fiscal and economic implications material to Ramsey County and Mounds View School District thirty days prior to the public hearing has also been accomplished. She added that the next step is for Council to review the preliminary draft documents in preparation for the April 26 public hearing. She drew attention to specific pieces of information within the drafts. Mayor Sather commented that since the preliminary draft documents were just received and Council has not had the opportunity to review theml it would be prudent to simply acknowledge receipt of the drafts and arrange to discuss the documents either at the next Counci 1 worksession or regular Council meeting. Councilmember Malone asked if ,John Arkell is willing t.o accept a I eve I of property valuation to assure a certain 1 eve 1 of property tax on the development. Person stated that matter would be addressed within the Development Agreement, a draft of whi ch will be provided to Council pt"ior to the April 26 hearir~g. Malone asked if there is any further action requit"ed of Council pr-i:)!:" to the Ap t"i I 26 hearing, Person answered nOI . but suggested t.hat Council appoint the 1 ar..:; firm of Dorsey & WhitnEY as legal cottnse 1 for this TIF mat tet., , . . Arden Hills Council 13 March 29, 1993 MOTION: Probst moved, seconded by Malone, to acknowledge receipt of the TIF preliminary draft documents and direct staff to schedule a time during the Council's next worksession to discuss those documents. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to appoint the law firm of Dorsey & Whitney as 1 egal counsel for this TIP matter. Motion carried unanimously (5-0), COUNCIL COMMENTS SNELLING/T.H. 51 INTERSECT ION Councilmember Aplikowski apologized to Council for her expression of frustration this evening during the Snelling/T,H 51 discussion, She added that she has felt victim of a higher level of government when dealing with MNDOT on this issue. BUDGET . Councilmember Malone noted that Accountant Post, in his March 16, 1993 memo has asked for direction regarding the handling of special revenue funds such as the Program Fund and Shade Tree Fund, Malone recalled the original intended management of these funds called for the funds to be "zeroed out" at year end, Malone commended staff for attaining very favorable year end figures in special revenue funds and in the public works area. MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Aplikowski, to make appropriate end of year transfers to close out the Program Fund and Shade Tree Fund to zero and transfer remaining funds to the General Fund. Motion can-ied unanimously (5-0), WATER RATES Administrator Person distributed to Council a March 25 memorandum from Accountant Post regarding the water purchase price increase and the two-tier pricing method facing the City 1 I", 1993, Given the fact that this memo was just distributed, Council agreed to discuss these matters at thei r next Council worksession, . -.---- un ------ , , Arden Hills Coun8il 14 March 29, 1993 . MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Probst, to direct staff to include in the next utility billing a notice and explanation of anticipated rate increases, Motion carried unanimously (5-0). ADJOURN MOTION: Hicks moved, seconded by Aplikowski, to adjourn the meeting at 9:37 p.m. Motion carried unanimously (5-0) . Thomas R, Sather, Mayor Dorothy A. Person, Clerk Administrator NOTICE OF MEETINGS: The next regular Council meeting will be held April 12, 1993 at 7:30 p,m, at the Mounds View Senior High School Cafeteria. The next Council worksession will be held at 4: 30 p. m, , April 20, . 1993 at City Hall. . , ~ . CITY OF ARDEN HILIS PAGE 1 OF 3 ACOXlNTS PAYABLE, CLAIMS REPORl' SlliCE 3/29/93 OOONCIL MEEl'ING CHECK NUMBER DATE VENOOR AMJUNI' o:::M1ENl'S 5449 04/02/93 MN ENVIRONMENI'AL INITIATIVE $ 50.00 SEMINAR 04/15 5450 04/02/93 E-Z ~CLlliG, lliC. 4,873.90 MARCH SERVICE 5451 04/09/93 lOoIA REI'IREIDNI' TRUST 457 PIAN 870.00 1ST APRIL P /R 5452 04/09/93 POBLIC EMPlDYEES REI'. ASSOC. 2,034.24 1ST APRIL P /R 5453 04/09/93 STATE CAPITAL CREDIT UNION 1,082.14 1Sr APRIL P /R 'IOl'AL PAID QfECKS THIS PERIOD 8,910.28 ADO: UNPAID (T1-T58), PAGE 3 OF 3 21,483.40 'IOl'AL A/P CXlUNCIL CLAIMS FOR $ 30,393.62 OJTJNCIL APPROVAL 04/12/93 r: Accounts payable checks issued on 03/30/93 after approval at the 03/29/93 Council meetin3', were check numbers 5386 to 5448. (Checks 5384 & 5385 were used for aligment.) '!his sequence co=esponds to unpaid tenq;>orary numbers T1 - T63. . ---.--- 9 A:-, "--, . .'., :-, ~" '". - . . - 2 . 1::.-"= ?M ~ -,..,..,'.' '-.,.,-, .;F=<~~; -'~---' NU:T.be :- ........::;,;-,:;., Ve;1c.~: :.- A-~ ~ -,,-.:'-'...---.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ T0000 ,~ 0604!: .:-:.. Y-:.'....:::ELS? D:]C? .~C. , -=~-:C . ';1. ![j::j T0000::' 0010," ACCUR.!\':'E PRESS, T1'V"" 765.90 -","-... . T0008'::, 01340: ASC' 8NG=N~:':::<ING 2,000.fJZ T000iJ4 001:::' AI~ ELECTR::C SE?V=C~ 191.51 T00005 0011-3 .~.IFS::G~\~.I1L . I:;.~:= . 10.5.2 T000'?I:; 0l?1 ' I::: ':M'=''::''''I~'''~'' T.1""r-J>;;"".T 27.00 _H ___..... "'C'H', ....,;._,,'u~., T00~)~); 001':':::: _~\>1~::;:2:C~~:: =,'r'~::~'E~' I .,..... ,,'~ :'.. 3 . :,~):= T0080E3 0010::' A r,S:2:!.J ElT...:"S T::?E - SE5:VICE 57121.29 T0000'? QH31=:S 3?',~ :....~~C2_IT3(~.,r::S , ,..... -~-, J:S. ':?~: :,,:'j.~ . T00018 00151 CARI...SCN EQUI?~'12~r:' CO. l5.92 T00'.:;':"':" 0015? ,~._~:~_=~::::=_:':[ :!::'~ ~=A~-~!: .- :(-::~" :-'T ':T::;"'C_'_: :)1.:'1). .. '-'-'--'--- . _........~'---- T00Gl::' 00153 CEL~uL,,;R ONE 18,85 T00013 0034:, C:TY OF SH8S8V~8W 2~~).69 T00014 00161 rnu;:j!pr. T:- C:"SANING 137.39 ~...) y ......"..1.......... T0001: 0019-;' r', ..-. ~~~'! 147..:;.:~~ ......' . ',~ . T0001C 06048 ~:"'=--~~'1 C;.2=O~ 40,00 T000l7 001': ~?':2:=:;.]:::~:'._.'::.- ;~:''':'F1PA='_;:3 ,::"62, ~~~~ T00():~:3 0017" Fe.STEP 3I-L~_RL,,; 240.00 T00e.~'.? 00176 ?8.~_':~r{..s__~;')~<S' S SA~')D~^n\:~s STCRE'.~ S7 _::. '; T00020 00180- 'GA.L:"l\GESR' S SERVICS, INC. 178.38 .02, 001,\3S :'';C?:-!Sh S~~~~':'2 c:r~ -CI~~i..., ,1'T" 5 5 ,:Z:'J ~~..~ . 0""'.. 00191 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE 155.0';0 'L.__ T000=-_~, 00190 ~AFMC~ G~ASS COM?A~Y 6,~. '~3 T000::'4 0022:: r..:',r~n'-" SUF~'~J'{ CD;"'~PP.,!~Y 1/214.23 ..~ 1. -'-' '.','..0 T00C::' 0Se.4~ -"..,,"7'r' ~~;::>~:~ 2??~::"""':=' -, r~ ,':.t_, -..-"---- ':"':J.. :"" T00r2!?6 00208 ,r " ",~Y " T t,...,,~ 3'J?FL Y 323.5Q ~... -.j ~'- T00:'J::: '7 00::S'~ ",~-' ~, ," .s;3' . :~ ::; - - .-.-- ~- T00G2? 00402 K~~~'.!. cC'~.tr''''''-'pc :::::~'V." 520.08 .---...,.. -'- -....., T0'J:J ~_ (]I ('>. ~'J " '-.".': ~"~v~~~:~~:A~ ~?~~='[ ':i~" " V'U ~ __ . ~ T000.?? 0""~ -,., LP..'.':S'J~'1 ?S:f-:-\DL:CT~3, :FC . 306.07 ' '6"::..;...:.. T00Ci~' ' ill 0 ::: ~ ~~ ~;'r::; -',,>.J2:~ '-~ ':JV'-,'-;'-~ 22-3./7 __ _ H.__'_ T0003:: 0023':; ,~'t\ " C'~JEEN ~Qr..] I ?~ltS>i'I' :NC. 3~Q .,0 ........... -- T00Gj.:? .~. .0(t4::.) :,-,!:~V~:~Z ::::: ,::.==_ ':~C'~-~:::':;Uy -.,' '>'.' - ~ T08C~'J~; 082') ~ V~"""'~" IN~3?S(::'=:' ~i:::'~: SE:?1.f::CE 504.88 T000'::.: C:H~ ~Z L; _, ..r~,~:-,'-, '"lic_S':::'=: '-"':'""-:',:,:?:-,' n'~,,~~~_~ , -'c;_ . T0002'~ 002~_'_~ >~==.',\J2S'-=- :::1.~'c:. ::-_r~c::c: ?PCDUC:'S 1,....... ,--." - .. _r....' ~~_,~ ...":1!. '::;=' T00i027 (:~ :~~..:; (/, ' ',/:- '.'\' ,~-., :,'"";~ 1\ .? ~~ ',r::=~ :'_"2: ... '~S . -.._- ,'.. - -- .-. ~ "-, TO 0 '2 ~:>:: 26 0jL~ ~:' Y::: >~~,;S :3:J~.r::. S'.~.,C 2: S':::'~: -'~7" ,...., 24~,?C .~ ~ ~'. ..... T00C__ 0:J2~:- '.t:'.,-,.,-"~c, .,-.----.-.'-,--, ,'-" '_.,""-. .::.;~ . "~ ", ., --, . ___._ '_U'_ . ., - -- - - .--.,- -- ~_. T00C;)4:; 0f7' ::':;,: ~'.~:::'~==" :T2: C:Jl"~?A~:-! 284. 7::~ T0f00 C ~ i"fI "'., (' ::i"~, :::.-~~-: ~~~';' " ',.,r ""..--; .,.) u.:.. _'._ -. ,._-~. --- . T0.:~8,'; :~' 0S.22t:: >TC?'::-:2E?>J C:'";'1 ~ 'T'L:;'r:: ?Cr..J;:S CC~~P~.YY 11 ....,. .-, _'~ ?- ., '_' _,. ~___L.- ":!:, 'D.:.-::t, '!..-. ~ T00!.,."':'~ ~ 0':8: ,~;.-. ~,"7. - -.',rn--, '.~(-'.'TT,~. .....,~ ..--""",, .. -;'.--,,-"" ----. T0S~>_;.' (0) :.2'~)" I::;':'l(;~~< ':':T;''='1,>-''r--::~ :"--'("'l'8,~~.:V -'-\-'i--" 4,512 ~-_.."._---- '-'~.._--~'-_. T02',.~ ~~.':) ~~ ':; " ,., ( ~.~ ';'-::'.: ,,- ~ ',' ~ .. , -,. ." .u _ 'T\r.o.n..' 0G,3'::' :='?--:? ~:~::.:= ;~. >~ ;=: =- ?~JJC2S_~ . :~..,-, 6: "'^ J..V.J"I.j','..'::'- - ~ . - .~ .'c'~ 0':12< _ "-"I" . J. - ....' -,. \.' ~ _ .. ,_.. -... - , .(),':.:'. 00':::0::: -:::'t~!'~--::2'!. ::C:,]:,f'::":"! 7 3 _: . .;- .... /.,,,.-. T00C eC-3::'" ' .. '.~ '.' -.-"- ---.. T0(,jes~: 0033" ~=;"=-::::=;'~? 2:?-__~S. '::"'._':,~=,=? (:C~i,!:::'p..lrl 3 . 5.~ T0(11~:>,,-" ~~ ~~ -3 .." '. ~-..., ," .. ::i~"~~~' <".-:-':~ - -,-'" .. ~. ""'.:7\ c~ n, "".--,.,.-.., '3;:::' 7:::: ::.'c-,-. ":':;"',~ '--'. "~",,'" - ~ lC";. F':- '-v{"~ ;_ . -. ~.o '.' "~ _ ._ - -. - . -" Tl?:"Jr.'.. ~J ri:; _ ,- "'7 ."., ,. ~ : \:: "::,'i)? ':; :017.: .. -,--.- ~7'""";~. . r,'r..' - ._.,.""_-,..,e'_ --, 4((.':). : ' - - . 9 .'\ne- t ':j '::-1 Unpaid 3u~mary Chec:~ ?eq:s~2r ?Et'-0"':- 3 it 4 : 5 3 Pi1 C:TY OF ARDEN HILLS C:1f.2C% N:.;m.::>:;::- Date Vendor l\1'V'r..,n...... ~.~l.-.J-'--... '- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TI2I12I055 00327 ST. PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY 9.37 T00056 00353 TEAM LABORATORY CHEMICAL 201.99 T00057 0036121 US WEST CO~~UNICATIONS 822.4121 T00058 00378 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 175.09 Grand Tota:!.. 21483.40 . . . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 RESOLUTION APPROVING PREMISE PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATION BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the city of Arden Hills agrees to approve the Class B Pull-Tab Premise Permit Renewal Application for the American Business Womens Association Roseville Chapter Lady Slipper, to operate at Flaherty's Arden Bowl, 1273 West County Road E, Arden Hills, Minnesota. Adopted by the Arden Hills City Council this 12 th day of April, 1993. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ARDEN HILLS . Thomas R. Sather, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy A. Person, city Administrator Councilmember moved adoption of the foregoing resolution and the same was declared adopted upon unanimous yes vote of all members present. witness my hand and seal of office at Arden Hills, Minnesota, this day of , 1993. . HI!lll'l'ES . cr:t'Y OF 'DIE 1lRDEN HILtS, ~ PLllNNDli <XIIMISSICIiI MEE'l'DG ~, APRIL 7, 1993 . 7:30 P.M. - crrr ID\LL C\L'L TO CIlDER Acting Chair Piotrowski called the meetin:J to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL C\L'L Present: Acting Chair, Barbara Piotrowski, Members: Ray MdiraW, steve Erickson and Marty Rye. Absent: Jeanne Winiecki, Scott Petersen and Dave carlson. Also ~ ~.;:'3I\t: Cc:ul'C; l""""t..>r Dale Hicks, Planner John Bergly, Ccmmunity Planning Coordinator Catherine Iago, Recor'din; Secretary Renee I Kaulfuss and introduction of new staff """"t..>r Intermediate Clerk, Jackie I<n.<:Mlton. APPRCl'1E MINll'l'm M::Graw moved, secon:led by Erickson, to approve the Marc:h 3, 1993, Pl.annin:1 Minutes as suJ:mitted. All voted in favor. (4-0). PUBLIC HElUU!C - Cl\SE #93-01: llEZCNIm AND POD GENERAL DEVELClPMENr PLAN. ECGEWATER ESTATES. 31m 1lDDITICIiI. PAUL J!'F.T,~. Acting Cllair piotrowski opened the public hearing at 7: 36 pII, Case #93- 01, Rezoning, and Amenied l?UD and Final General Oevelopnent Plan for 2 Additional TcMnhame Units. . Commlmity Planning Coordinator, Cathy Iago confirmed the publication of the Notice of Hearing in the New Briahton Bulletin on Wednesday, Marc:h 24, 1993, and mailing to affected property owners on the same date. Planner Bergly referred to his report dated April 7, 1993 and remirxied the CoImni.ssion in February 1993, the Preliminary l?UD Plan was awroved by the CoImni.ssion and Council, b.1t the Council chose to delay waiver of the moratorium until such tllne as the Final l?UD Plan was before them for action. In addition, the rezoning was n; "'"'ISSed by the Planning Commission and COUncil in February when the preliminary PUD was reviewed. Rezoning of the property from R-l to R-3 is rer-="''rrY to a........."."odate the proposed toltInhouse development. The General PUD Plan (Final PUD Plan in new Ordinance) incorp:>rates the Final Plan, site Plan (including Gradin:J and Drainage), Buildin:J Plan and Landscape Plan. The Planner also suggests that Commission consider requesting the Townhouse Association to incorporate the landscape plan in relation to the berm to their By-laws enabling the plan to be clearly identified. Planner Bergly noted the following considerations: l. A Zoning district charge from the existing R-1 District to the required R-3 District must be made during the General Development (Final Plan) Approval stage. . 2. Included in the General PUD Plan are: a. Final Plat (Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, El:1gewater Fstates 3rd Addition) . The plat divides the property into 3 lots: 2 - 30' x 120 I lots on which the toltInhomes will be placed; and pl;111"11'1;1'Il'T n -.-..;!CLClion Meetina 2 4-Q7-9!3 -___ CASE #93-01; (ccmH..._) . the 3rd lot which is COll1Iroll open space for use by all -hI>rs of the Townhome Homeowner's Association. All of the east 40 feet of Lot 3 (lyin3' between Lot 2 ani the Highway ~ is in a drainage ani utility easement. An existin;J flCfNage --rtt exten:ls across the NE corner of Lot 3 J:ut does not infrin;Je on the 2 I:uildin3' lots. A 10 foot drainage ani utility easement runs across the front of the property, adjacent to Brueberry lane. '!he En;Jineer ani Public Works Director feel that these easements are adequate. '!he Final Plat is used as the base plan for the site Plan. '!he separate Final Plat Document will be available for city signatures follC7llin; Council approval of this application ani closin3' on the sale of the l'L'-'I:'= ty by the City ani Developer. b. All aspects of the site Plan are identical to the Preliminary Plan approved in February J:ut with greater refinement. '!he benn at the SW corner of the site is about 5' above the street ani driveway. '!be benn height alO1'XJ Old Highway 10 is 3' above the grade at the l::uilding line ani about 6 I above the street level. A drainage swale between the bJilding ani the benn will carry surface water to the north into the flCfNage easement ani to the south into the street. '!be storm sewer shown is existirg ani carries water iran the catch basins in the street to the NE corner of the . site where it empties into the flCfNage ..,,,,,..'''''''It. On March 24, 1993, the RCWD approved the drainage plan subject to payment of the cash surety to guarantee project COllpletion. All Ordinance requirements, in addition to the l:uilding setbacks, are met. 3. '!he approved preli1n:inary plan included I:uildin3' plans iran the previously constJ:ucte:i units with minor changes noted. '!he revised bJilding plans incorporate all of the specific changes ~u~ for the 2 unit structure. Finish, trilll ani colors will be identical to existin3' units. 4. Revisions have been made to the location of trees as recommended in the Preli1n:inary Plan review. Trees proposed along the east side of the bJildin3' should be plante:! west of the top of the berm due to the location of the sewer line inside the property line. Although specific varieties of shrub species is not indicated, the range of species indicate:! for each size groupin3' allows for some flexibility . The amount of the Lan:lscape Performance Bond will be set by staff ani IlII.ISt be provided by the Applicant prior to issuance of a Building Permit. 5. Negotiations for the sale of this property by the City, resulted in a price that includes a value for park dedication. . "~1"Tm;1V'I n-wnn;!Clsion Meetinc:r 3 4-07-93 Cl\SE #93-01; (oontimIed) . 6. As the =iginal POD approval was f= an overall density that is well within the existirg ordinance regulations, the increased density provided by the new R-3 District is irrelevant. All requirements of both the existirg ani proposed ordinances have been met, so waiver of the JOOratoril.Dll to allow the City to act on this Application is aw.<~date. Planner Bergly reccmrnerxied the followirg actions: 1. Waive the Develcpnent Moratoril.Dll, rationale beirg the proposed POD Amerx:lment meets all requirements of both the existirg ani proposed ordinances . 2. Rezone the 100' x 150' site from the R-l District to the R-3 District, rationale beirg the proposed development is consistent with the Arden Hills Ccmprehensive Plan; it is an expansion of a previously developed R-3 District; ani it was not previously included in the R-3 District because it was City owned property use:l f= a lift station. 3. Approve the amended POD General Development Plan, rationale beirg the Plan is consistent with the concept Plan approved in February, 1993 ani incorporates changes rec:amnelXied in that approval; the Plan is an expansion of an existirg POD; ani the amen:lment to an existirg POD, meets all Ordinance requirements. . '!he Planner suggested a provision should be included in the POD Permit that clearly defines the Homeowners' Association's responsibility for maintaining or replacirg 1arxiscapirg in drainage ani utility easements if the City is required to perform utility maintenance work within the easement that results in damage to trees ani shrubs ani request the Association to incorporate these requirements into their By-laws. Erickson questioned if the city Engineer has reviewed this ~~ POD as he does not see any report = documentation in the packet from the Engineer . Bergly explained that the Planner, Engineer, Attorney ani staff will meet monthly to review all issues beirg presented to the Planning Commission. '!hey will then incorporate all reports into one report thus eliminatirg various reports to the Commission, various opinions ani various handouts being presented. Bergly stated the Engineer had no concerns. Erickson questioned the responsibility of maintaining the trail ani if maintaining the trail was necessary. Bergly stated the trail will need to be maintained to allow the U.S. Fish & wild Life Department access. ' Mdiraw questioned who owned the property behind the trail area. It is owned by the U. S. Fish & wild Life Department. Rye questioned the Flood Elevation. Bergly stated it is in conformance. . Rye questioned what type of Erosion COntrol is beirg used especially on lDt 3 after the lift station is rerrmred. Bergly explained there is a silt fence installed below the construction line. '!he Developer, Paul Keleher mentioned the excess material on the west side of the property is beirg removed. Rye would like to suggest that the buil~ official --- 1 . 0Cmn' . Meetinq 4 04-o7-9~ p ann,""J 'Q1on Cl\SE #93-01 cOontirP.....) . add erosion =ntrol to his list of items to be inspected durin;r the I::W.lding inspection procedures am that erosion =ntrol be in place before any J:W.lding =nstruction takes place. Rye commented that fast germinating grass be planted to stabilize graded areas. McGraw questioned whether the Canunission has the authority to require a developer to stabilize grading within a certain period of tine. Erickson located the Ordinance in the Zoning Code, Section 6, page 17 which stipulates a recommerxied method is permissible, no tine frame is stipulated, J:ut would be appropriate. Erickson questioned the issue of Park Dedication fees. Bergly stated the fees will be part of the purchase agreement am staff will allocate the appropriate proportion of the sellin;r price to the park dedication fuOO.. Actin;r Chair Piotrowski askerl if there were any questions or c:omments from the floor. 'Il1e Developer, Paul Keleher stated that RCWD had approved the plan am that he submitted the $1,000 SUrety Bond to RCWD this date. Actin;r 01ai.r Piotrowski closed the public hearin;r at 8: 02 pII. Actin;r Chair piotrowski askerl if there were any additional questions or . comments from the Canunission. Erickson !roVed, seconded by McGraw to reconnnend to Council to waive the Development MJratorium Ordinance am to reconnnend to Council approval of the Rezoning from R-1 to R-3 with the rationale included in the Planner's report of 4/7/93. All voted in favor. (4-0). McGraw !roVed, seconded by Erickson to recommend to Council approval of Case #93-01 P{JJ) Final Plan 2 Townhome Units with the rationale outlined in #3, a,b & c of the Planner's report of 4-7-93, and with the requirement that the Townhame Association in=rporate in their By-taws the requirement for assuming responsibility for maintai.nin;r the landscaping on the berm, am that Erosion Control including l:ut not limited to silt fence be erected prior to any site grading am that it be maintained throughout the project am soils should be stabilized within 72 hours of corrpletion of final grading with terrporary vegetation =ver or sodding as determined by the project foreman. All voted in favor. (4-0). Community Plannin;r Coordinator Iago eJq:llained to the Developer that procedure has changed and Planning Commission recommendations will be presented to Council at their last Council meeting of the month, instead of their first Council meeting of the month. Developer became quite frustrated at learni.no of this change in procedure this evening as tinting is critical to begin const:J:uction. It was suggested by staff . that since this change was not =nveyed to him prior to this evening, staff would look into the possibility of adding this one case to the April 12 Council agenda. - __ ___.___ _n___n_.____ -- ----- .-,:"nminrr l'!t'wmt; !Clsion Meeti1Yr 5 04-07-93 DISCOSSICfi: 0l'HER PL>>lNI!C IB8tlml . INl'RlXXlCTICfi OF Rl\TE HDEBSaI Kate l{I1E'~h, editor of the City of Arden Hills Newsletter was inw.uJu.ce::l. to the Commission. Kate explained the backgrourx:l of the Newsletter am invita:l the Commission members to suggest items to be included in the quarterly Newsletter. She is open to any camnents = questions. Erickson commented that the Newsletter was well written, very improved, am enjoys recei.vi.rg it. '!he other Commission members agreed. Keep up the good work. STATCS REl'(Rl' Cfi BERM M' OLD IDlY 10 1\1!lD ~ I:lUVE Handouts were given to members of the Commission relatirq to the revisions made to the benn at Old HighYJay 10 am Parkshore Drive. '!he Developer Paul Keleher explained only the lam under which the home is b.1i.lt on is CMned by the resident. All the rest of the land is COIIUIIOn area am in the Association By-laws they cannot approve anythi.n;J that would be consistent with the city 0rdiI1ance ie: fences , lanO<:r;lpirq etc. '!he input on the Sanitary Sewer is approxilnately the same ason the initially approved plan, ie: somewhat less on Parkshore Drive am somewhat more on Old HighYJay 10. '!he City ~i.neer am the Public Works SUperintendent will review these revisions pri= to a meetirq with the . homeowners. McGraw moved, seconded by Erickson to recommen:l to Council to accept the revision to the benn as proposed this evenin:f with the understanding that the Homec7tmers involved are agreeable to these chan:Jes, that the City ~i.neer am Public Works SUperintendent are satisfied with the Sanitary Sewer issue, am that if the lan:iscape plan is revised from the approved plan, that it be returned to the Planning Commission f= review pri= to Council approval. (McGraw, Erickson, Rye voting in favor; piotrc7Nski opposed). (3-1). ZONING & SIGN CRD:IlOOCES - MIKE CIIl\!GES Building Official David Kriesel is recommendi.ng to Commission to charY:l'e the proposed seven hundred (700) square foot maxi1!1um floor area for accessory structures to seven hundred twenty eight (728) square feet. Bergly is recomrnending minor c::han3'es in the lanclscapirq section of the appendix. This appendix was previously approved by Council. Community Planning Coordinator Cathy rage is recomrnending to include cloth bannel:-s in the section relatirq to prohibited signs. '!hese revisions were previously discussed, rot the recommendations were not acted upon. McGraw moved, seconded by Rye to recommend to Council approval of the . minor zonirq am sign ordinances c::han3'es as listed above. Motion carried. (4-0). ----- ---~--_.__._---- pb.nn;'YT Callni.ssion MeetiD::J 6 4-7-93~ Rye commented he would like to assist staff in drafting a section in the . ordinance pertaining to laniscaping for wild life. rago conunented at this tbne it may be appropriate to table action on this issue am draft additional language to add to the policy manual. '!his language would be included in the materials given to develcpm3 at the time of application. McGraw ncved, secon::led by Rye to table action on the proposed larnscape chanoes to include verbage relating to laniscaping for wild life. Motion carried. (4-0). CXlOK::IL REE'CRr Council1nember Hicks reported on items of interest to the Ccrnmission. ADJOllRN McGraw ncved, seconded by Rye to adjourn at 9:25 p.m. Acting emir Barbara piotrowski . . . _____n ___ ---- APR- '9-9::::: FRI 14 : 19' SANDER: AND ASSI:;)CIATES P.02 .. , . 7. Search lights. 8. Any sign placed on a vehicle or trailer which is parked or located for the primary purpose of displaying said sign, except such signs auached to licensed operable vehicles operating during the normal course of business. 9. Any sign that obstructS any window, door,fire escape, stairway, or other authorized or required building opening. 10. Any sign within the public right-of-way, or within dedicated public easements except that the City Council may, upon recommendation from the Planning Commission, grant a Permit to allow temporary civic or community promotion signs to be located within rights-of-way and easements for a specific period of time. ll. Banners nennants. ribbons. streamers. strine:s of Iie:ht bulbs. excent as soecial event silms as allowed by council annroval. F. SIGN AREA CALCULATIONS. The following sign area calculations shall apply to all signs regulated by this Ordinance. 1. Freestanding signs (except ground and monument signs), inclUJiing umporary ground mounted signs. The area shall include the entire sign face and any . borders and frame but shall not include the sign support whether under or along side of the sign face. 2. Ground signs, monument signs and wa11 mounted signs. The area shall include the entire face of a sign if the sign is structurally or visually a self-contained unit that is either mounted on or applied to the sign support structure, wall, fence or building facade but shall not include the sign support structure, wall, fence or building facade. If the sign consists of individual letters and/or sign graphics fastened to these same support structures, the area shall be the smallest 4-sided geometric figure which circumscribes all the letters, words and sign graphics, 3. Back Lit canopy signs or marquee signs. The sign area shall include the entire back lit area of lit canopy signs or the entire back lit area of the face of marquees. 4. Double-faced signs. The area and size regulations apply to only one side. 5. Changeable copy signs. A business sign consisting solely of changeable copy shall not be permitted. Changeable copy signs shall be allowed only when designed and constructed as part of a business sign containing permanent copy identifying the business to which it relates. The changeable copy portion shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the total area of the business sign of which it is a part. . 13 APR- 9-93 FRI 14:2e SANDER AND ASSOCIATES P.0=3 . . L SIGN pERMITS. 1. Application Procedure. Any person proposing to erect, place, reconstruct, alter or relocate any sign, except signs specifically exempt by this ordinance, shall make application for a sign permit. This application shall be submitted on forms prescribed or required by the administrator and shall be accompanied by the submittal material required in the Sign Permit section of Appendix A of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Issuance of Sign PenniJ. Upon filing of an application. the administrator shall examine the plans and accompanying data and determine if they are in compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. If they are found to be In conformance, the administrator shall follow the City review procedure contained in the Sign Permit Section of Appendix A of the Zoning Ordinance as prescribed for by "Initial Review and Approval" in Tables VI A and VI B. 3. pennil Fees. a. Initial Application Fee. An initial application fee shall be required with the application for any sign permit requiring a fee. b. Annual Fee. An annual sign permit fee shall be required for all permanent signs except the following: . 1. Government signs; 2: Directlooal signs; 3. Informational signs; 4. PersonaLidentification signs; 5. Window signs. c. Certain Temporary Signs Require Annual Application and an Annual Fee. 1. The ffiUs";:ifl; tempeery sigB5 ret{uire a:a anmutl ~:plieatiefl ed Mfttull fee: a. Class I Raw Esmte 3igflS; e. Pelitieallii~; 2. Eaeh real estate Groee St iBaiYistial eff~rifl; rzal :.sme fer sale; pelitieaJ. eaaaiaate; Elf ~ens8r af a feferenlitim sigH, shall ma:![e BppIieatisa f.ef a 1 year permit eaeh year prier te if1sta:1IiBg signs. This fJefAlit shall 8 a \'8:li~ fer aU si;as i.ns~loo ia the 12 ER0BtB !leriat! fellewiag 1ft&. iS5\l&nce *-llle-pefBlif-lly-llle-indi':i<!llLll, ageae)' t gre1:if3 Sf Elan)' te ?~em me sibS permit i3 i5SHea4 1.3-:- An annual (12 months from permit date) Special Event Sign Permit shall be required for each school, church, civic . organization or co~ercial establishn:ent proposing to uti! ize such signs, The annual permit and fee shall be valid for up to 3 special events pennitted within 12 months of the permit for each organization or establishment. 25 APR- '$1-'9:3 FRZ 14:21 SANDER AND ASSOC.IATE:S P.04 . 2.+.- Fees for community promotion signs are l1ereby waived. . d. Amount a/Initial and Annual Fees. The amount of said initial and annual sign pennit fee shall be as establisl1ed from time to time by resolution adopted by the City Council. . . . 26 -------..-- APR- ~-93 FRZ 14::37 SANDER AND ASSOCIATES P..12t2 . . SECTION VI. GENERAL REGULATIONS A. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. 1. Tim4 of COnstruCtioll_ No lICCeSSOf)' slrUCtUrll shall be COJIStn1Cled aD ...y lot prior to tho time of construction of the prtacipal SlruClUI'e to which it is accessoty. 2. Height. No accessory structure shall ex~ the height of the prtacipal structure to which it is aecessory . 3. Locat/J1II. No accessory structures in the R-l or R-2 Districts shall be localed """"'" tho frol1llot line than the front yatd setback line for the principal structure to which it is accessory. Accessory strUCtures as permitted an\! regulated in this ordinance may be located wilhill the rear yard of the principal structure. 4. Site Plan Review Required. Before installation of any accessory structure in any district, except the R-t ana R-2 Districts, an on through lots in the R-t ana R-2 Districts, a Silo Plan Review ana Council Approval shall be required. s. Siz4. In R-l ana R-2 Districts, no accessory structure shall exceed seven hundrel! twenlV eivht mll1 ~ square feet in floor ..... and for accessory structures localed in the rear yard of a principle structure, the total floor area of an such accessory struclUteS shaU Dot exceed twenty-five (2S) perceut of the minimum requirel! rear yatd ..... for the principal structure. . i B. ACCESSORY USES. 1. Accessory BeMa SakI, Processing, and Storage. Accessory retail sales shall be permitted in industrial districts, and accessory processing, assembly, repair, and stonge of materials shall be permitted in business districts when such uses .... directly associated with the principal use, and when such accessory uses .... clearly incidental. 2. Day Carr Faciliti4sfor Houses of Worship and Schools. Day care f"cilities for over loll (10) persons shall be considered as accessory uses for houses of worship and schools wilhill all residential districts if located in the principal building. 3. Home Occupations. Home occupations are allowed as either accessory uses or special uses depending on tbe cbaracteristics of the operation. a. All home occupations shall comply with the following conditions: (1) It sbaU not result in traffic, parking, noise, light, fumes and odors to such an extent that it is noticeable that the property is being used for non-residential purposes. (2) It shall be conducted entirely wilhill the dwelling. (3) There is no exterior evidence of the home occupation. . (4) It does not require any special e"trances to the dwelling. VI - I . -' . CITY OF ARDEN mLLS 1993 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENTS PUBLIC HEARING . APRIL 12, 1993 BITIJMINOUS OVERLAY AND SEAL COAT IMPROVEMENTS MARK GRAHAM, crrY ENGJrtrl.Ki!X DOROn:lY PERSON, crrY ADMINISTRATOR roM SATHER, MAYOR . . 520-039-58 -~ ---- I --.J I l f - w. CClUIl1Y ROAO .11" IW. S.T.It. NO.. 't t-. / / II -- I -- '( ~. .11 -. ~ ::J .. OJ.. ""'~ r'........_~== IIIICU : .;.~' i .;;;;;:;;;l ~_lJRm...I~! .. .. ~ o I~ .-.., ~ ..01)" l - .... ..~.. ~"'f' is .""-- ~ " ."'" , '\70.... I.'" ~ .....~r~ lD ~ ~ 'E ~ -'-'(':.;..! . ;//~ \ "Irr ~f1 "'- .1 ,,~ .......L -......; --::: r-. r-' ~ -II I'DII' (I V ~ \ /1 i \( :' ~ ~J\' "1if ~ ,) J...- \ ~ ~ _, ~ ~~~~ ~l$J.' ~~.. .. \ ~ts ~ '\ "-- ~ r... ~ ~ +dl- : _;G ,,~~ r; 1 7~.., '\ r::~t\ ~ (I ~ II ,I I 1=;1.-1 .., ~ \ ...J k, () _ 1'''f. ..... ~ - 1.,-" ~ '" T f. )) ""T' "",f- ......... .1 \ // r ~ PROPOSED BITUMINOUS OVERLAY --"'~..:I-" 1993 PAVEUEN'T Maier Stewart. ~ ~ t ~;.tes Jnc. EXHBT 1 - BE1HEI.. cau..EGE \"C; C;,,1 ~ ,,\. "",C; \. ~ PROPOSED SEALCOAT '" ." + + ,. " +" )0 \."I<E E II'" SEP ~o """~rJtI 1993 PAVEMENT MANTENANCE IMPROVB.ENTS Maier Stewart EXHBIT 2 " Associates Inc. . . Streets are chosen based on field rating and comparison of aU City streets. AlternatileS are reconstruction, overlay, seal coating, or do ' nothing. . City's Assessment Policy is: a) 50% of bituminous overlay project costs is assessed to abutting property owners on per front foot basis. . b) Remaining 50% is funded by City, along with 100% of seal coating project costs. c) Properties abutting overlay improvements completed within last 5 years are ."--assed for the difference between the sum of their short side footage plus one-third the long side and their previous assessment. This applies to properties abutting West Floral Drive. d) There are 307 townhouse units served by Arden View Drive and Arden View Court. Tbe S1ssPllmlent per unit is equal to 50% of the project cost of the overlay divided by the total number of units. - . . . A feasibility report was prepared in March 1993 which ~:.t1ated the assessment rate to be $3.03 per front foot. Based on bids recehed on April 6, 1993, the proposed assessment rate has been reduced to $2.98 per front foot. For example, a property with 125 feet of frontage would be aS$1('ssed $372.50 for their share of the overlay improvements. As a comparison, the 1991 assessment rate was $2.82 per front foot. . The proposed assessment for each townhome unit is $63.78. . . Next step in procedure is to order an assessment hearing for May 10, 1993. An itemized assessment for each property wUl be prepared and a hearing held to recehe public comments. . Work is anticipated to be constructed in June and July of 1993. Access to driveways will be provided at all times m<<:ept when work is occurring directIy in front of each home. . . .. . . ~ . PROlF.CT SCH...IlTTT P. The fol1owing project schedule is p.OpOSed for the 1993 Pavement Maintelllllll'J!: Improvements Project: Receive Revised Feasibility Study, Order Public Hearing, March 8, 1993 and Order Plans and Spedfi....rinn$ . Approve Plans and Speci.ficatioos and Advertise for Bids March 8, 1993 Receive Bids AIpil6, 1993 Hold Public Hearing, Establish Assess-nt Amount, and Set April 12, 1993 Assessment Bearing Date Hold Assessment Hearing May 10, 1993 Award Contract June 14, 1993 Begin Construction July 1993 Complete Construction August 1993 . .