Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 01-10-2000 . . . MINUTES CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 10, 2000 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Dennis Probst called to order the regular City Council meeting at 6:36 p.m. Present: Mayor Dennis Probst, Councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski, David Grant, Gregg Larson, and Lois Rem. Absent: None. Also present were City Administrator, Joe Lynch; City Accountant, Terrance Post; Public Works Director, Dwayne Stafford; Associate Planner, Nancy Randall; and City Engineer, Greg Brown, BRW; and Recording Secretary, Lori Rolfson. ADOPT AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to adopt the agenda for the January 10,2000, regular City Council meeting. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. December 6, 1999 Truth in Taxation Meeting Councilmember Larson requested the following changes to the minutes: On page 5, last paragraph, the first sentence should read, "Councilmember Larson requested confirmation that the increase..." On page 8, fifth paragraph, the first sentence should read, "...what each applicant feels he or she could bring..." MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the December 6, 1999 Truth in Taxation Meetings, as amended. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). CONSENT CALENDAR A. Claims and Payroll B. Regular Employee Status, Thomas J. Moore, Parks and Recreation Director C. Regular Employee Status, Michelle Olson, Recreation Program Supervisor MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar and authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10, 2000 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Probst invited those present to come forward and address the Council on any items not already on the agenda. There were no public comments. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. Planning Case #00-02, US West, 3499 Lexington Avenue, Special Use Permit and Site Plan for an Antenna and Ground Equipment Ms. Randall explained that the applicant was requesting a Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review to allow for the placement of a US West Wireless PCS antenna on the roof of the building and electronic equipment on the ground of the Catholic Aid Association located at 3499 Lexington Avenue North. The applicant was proposing to place an antenna on the top of the existing building. The proposed antenna is just under 12 feet tall and will be painted a light gray. The antenna requires electronic equipment to be located on the ground. The applicant was proposing this to be at the northwest comer of the building. The electronic equipment is screened by the building on the east and south sides, a proposed retaining wall on the west and existing trees on the north side. The City Ordinance states that no antenna or tower shall exceed a height of 75 feet. The proposed antenna and mounting is approximately 12 feet in the height and the building is approximately 42 feet in height for an overall total height of 54 feet. The applicant was proposing three antennas in one single cylinder, mounted at the top of a support assembly on the roof of the building. The proposed antenna meets the location and number of antenna requirements. The electronic equipment is five feet tall, eight feet long, and four feet wide. The equipment meets all required setbacks. Ms. Randall advised that the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Case 00- 02, Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review, subject to the following conditions: 1. The antenna and all mounts shall be painted light gray. 2. Existing trees along the north property line remain for screening. Ms. Randall stated that staff had recommended the proposed retaining wall be constructed to match the building. The applicant informed staff and the Planning Commission that the owner of the property was installing the retaining wall for drainage purposes. The retaining wall matches the building and is almost complete. Because the retaining wall was being installed for other reasons and will match the building, the Planning Commission did not include this as a condition. Councilmember Grant asked if the US West equipment will be visible from Lexington Avenue. Ms. Randall stated that the equipment will not be visible from Lexington Avenue. She explained ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 3 - that the equipment will be screened from Lexington Avenue by the existing building. The antennas themselves will be placed on top of the building and will be viewed from all directions. The City Ordinance does not require that the antennas be screened, however, in the past the City has required that antennas be painted gray or blue to match thc skyline. MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to approve Planning Case 00-02, Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review, conditioned on: 1. The antenna and all mounts shall be painted light gray. 2. Existing trees along the nortb property line remain for screening. The motion carricd unanimously (5-0). B. Ramsey County GIS Users Group, New .Joint Powers Agreement Mr. Lynch explained that the City Council was being asked to approve the Joint Powers Agrcement with Ramsey County to continue to supply Arden Hills with information and data to support the City's GIS system. This will also aid in the ongoing efforts of the I-35W Corridor Coalition. Mr. Lynch advised that statIrecommends the City Council authorize the Mayor and City . Administrator to execute the Joint Powers Agreement on behalf of the City of Arden Hills. Mayor Probst asked if the Joint Powers Agreement had been executed for 1999 and if there had been any changes to the Agreement. Councilmember Larson stated that the Agreement had been changed by striking the word "initial" in the first paragraph of page three. Mr. Lynch stated that copies of the signed Agreement from 1997 and 1998 were available. However, he could not find a signed Agreement for 1999. Councilmember Rem noted that Article 11 on page four of the Agreement stated, "This Agreement shall be in force through December 31, 2002..." She suggested that since this agreement was for two years, the previous Agreement may have been signed in 1998. MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to approve the new Joint Powers Agreement with Ramsey County to continue to supply Arden Hills with information and data to support the City's GIS system, and to approve the fee schedule. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS . Mr. Lynch stated that he had met with the Commander's Representative and the State of Minnesota regarding the testing at the TCAAP property for the potential transfer of the property to the City of Arden Hills. It was agreed that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency would perform additional on-site testing at their cost. The results ofthis test will be provided to the City. If the results of the test do not meet the required parameters, then the Department of Army and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency will be further involved. The City of Arden Hills ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 4 . will be provided with a portion ofthe sample in order for additional testing to be performed to ensure that if the soil must be removed from the site it will meet landfill requirements. Mayor Probst asked when the results of the soil testing were anticipated to be available. Mr. Lynch stated that the testing will be performed Wednesday or Thursday of this week and the results should be received within three weeks. Councilmember Aplikowski asked if the soil samples will be retrieved from the same place trom which they had previously been retrieved. Mr. Lynch stated that five separate core samples will be taken and combined into one sample. With regard to the soil samples that will be tested by the City, Councilmember Grant asked if the City will use the same testing method as the Army. Mr. Lynch explained that the City will be testing for leaching in order to prove to a landfill site that the soil meets their requirements. He indicated that the test will not be the same as that used by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Grant stated that he attended the Parks and Recreation Committee meeting on Saturday, January 8, 2000. With regard to the Bethel College proposed athletic complex, he indicated that the Committee will be submitting a request that Bethel College maintain the existing City trail that runs through the property. Mayor Probst confirmed that the trail being referred to was located on City property. Councilmember Grant stated that this was not correct. . In sections, the trail is on Bethel property. Councilmember Larson stated that the Water Quality Task Force will meet Tuesday, January 11, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. and the Planning Commission met on Wednesday, January 3,2000. The Planning Commissioners, with the exception of the Chair, were sworn in at the meeting. The Plmming Commission meeting was a full agenda and lasted until 11 :45 p.m. The most significant issue at that meeting was the request by Bethel College for the proposed athletic complex. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the athletic complex with some changes to the proposal. Councilmember Aplikowski stated that the Newsletter Committee met on Tuesday, January 4, 2000. She indicated that she was continually amazed at the dedication of this Committee. Councilmember Aplikowski stated that the Events Committee will hold its first meeting on Wednesday, January 12,2000 at 6:30 p.m. Councilmember Rem statcd that she attended the Foundation for the Ramsey County Library system. She indicated that the event had been well attended and she had brochures available for revIew. . Councilmember Rem stated that the Northwest Youth and Family Services will meet on Thursday, January 13,2000 at 7:00 p.m. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 5 With regard to the upcoming rctreat, Mayor Probst stated that the change in time proposed by staff was the result of a scheduling connict on his part. He indicated that he would not be available to attend the retreat until approximately 4:00 p.m. Mayor Probst noted that there had been a letter from staff sent to Mr. Scholl regarding the trail easemcnt. He assumed that no response had been received from Mr. Scholl. Mr. Lynch stated that this was correct. He explained that Mr. Scholl had responded to the original correspondence by indicating that he did not want to meet with the City and restating his desire to be compensated in the amount he had previously stated. The recent letter sent to Mr. Scholl was simply rcstating the case for the record. Mayor Probst suggested that the City Council discuss this issue at the next Council worksession in order to decide how to proceed. He indicated that the City of Arden Hills has been dealing with this issue for over one year and it needs to be brought to closure. He felt that the situation may require condemnation and he believed that Mr. Scholl was aware of this fact. Mayor Probst stated that he received an invitation from the Mayor of Rochester to attend an event hosted by Reverend Jesse Jackson being held on Martin Luther King Day. Mayor Probst indicated that he would not be available to attend this event and invited any interested Councilmember to attend in his place. Mayor Probst stated that last March he had participated in a Saturday event that looked at restructuring transit in sectors one and two of metropolitan area. Metro Transit has completed a report on this activity and has a proposal that will be presented on Tuesday, January 18,2000 trom 8:00 a.m. until 11 :00 a.m. If a representative of Arden Hills is not available for this presentation, Metro Transit has offered to present the report to the City Council. He indicated that if the City Council was interested in this presentation, it could be added to the January 18, 2000 Council worksession. Councilmember Aplikowski stated that she would not be available to attend the presentation. However, she would be interested in a presentation on the proposal. Councilmembers Grant and Larson concurred. Mayor Probst asked Mr. Lynch to contact the Metro Transit and request that a prcscntation be held for the City Council at the Worksession. COlillcilmember Aplikowski asked if the Metro Transit report included information other than light rail. Mayor Probst stated that the report did not involve light rail. Rather, the report deals with bus service. He indicated that the Metro Transit was moving in the direction of a grid system and has plans to improve the bus service in the northern metropolitan area. With regard to the retreat schedule, Councilmember Larson stated that he was available Friday evening and Saturday. He felt it important that the Mayor attend the entire retreat and was open to readjusting the schedule to begin Friday night when the Mayor is available. Mayor Probst and Councilmembers Aplikowski and Grant stated that they would be available to begin the retreat Friday night. Councilmember Rem stated that she did have other plans for Friday night, however, she may be able to cancel them and attend the retreat. Mr. Lynch stated that he would have to confirm room availability for Friday night. Mayor Probst suggested that the retreat begin at 4:00 p.m. Councilmember Larson agreed and suggested that dinner be brought in to the meeting. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 6 RECESS Mayor Probst recessed the meeting at 7:03 p.m. for the purpose of holding a Public Hearing on the proposed 2000 Street Improvement project, scheduled to begin at 7:30 p.m. Mayor Probst reconvened the meeting at 7:34 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING, 2000 STREET IMPROVEMENT PRO.JECT A. Resolution #00-05, Resolution Authorizing the Preparation of Detailed Plans and Specifications in the Matter of the 2000 Street Improvement Project. Mayor Probst opened the public hearing at 7:36 p.m. Mayor Probst stated that the purpose of this public hearing was to discuss the proposed improvements to the Ingerson neighborhood. He indicated that the City Administrator will confirm the legal publication ofthe public hearing, then the City Engineer will present the project He asked the public's indulgence to allow the City to present all the information. He noted that some residents attended the public meeting held November 29, 1999 regarding this project Since not all the local residents were at that meeting he asked that the others be allowed to hear the entire presentation. Mayor Probst stated that prior to the recess there had been a question regarding the two-minute time limit suggested in the public hearing information. Given the large number of people in attendance, Mayor Probst stated that this time limit will be adhered to for the first round of comments. If, after everyone has had a chance to comment, there are those with more comments beyond the time limit, the Council will allow a second round of comments. Mayor Probst was informed by residents of the Ingerson neighborhood that, in order to have fewer individuals repeat comments, they had appointed specific representatives to state their case with an organized presentation on the project for tonight's meeting, and asked the Council's indulgence in presenting their cause. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Probst agreed to deviate from the City's usual public hearing procedures. Mayor Probst stated that he had a list with 44 names of individuals who wish to speak this evening. In order for all of these people to have the opportunity to speak, he asked that those with more extensive presentations allow the others to speak first. Mayor Probst stated that once staff has completed the presentation, he would take comments and questions from statT and clarifications from the City Council. The meeting will then be opened to public comments. He asked that the comments be limited to two minutes. Mayor Probst addressed previously expressed concerns regarding any potential conflict of interest with the City's consulting engineering firm, and also advised Councilmembers that he had received a letter from Mayor Dan Coughlin of Mounds View informing that he had been invited to, and attended a neighborhood meeting in Arden Hills regarding this project Mayor Probst expressed his disappointment that the organizers of this meeting felt they needed to go to . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10, 2000 7 someone outside the community rather than inviting one of the City's elected representatives to address the issues and answer questions about the project. Mayor Probst asked the City Administrator to contirm the publications announcing this public hearing. Mr. Lynch stated that the public hearing had been announced in the December 29, 1999 and the January 5, 2000 publications of the Bulletin. He stated that he had an atlidavit of the mailing and a list of all the property owners who had received the mailing. Mr. Stafford stated that the City Engineer re-rated the City streets last summer in an effort to prioritize road maintenance and reconstruction projects in the coming years. The results of the ratings, including information regarding traffic counts, drainage, sewer and water infrastructure, and water quality were used to prioritize possible street projects. The City statT had identified the Ingerson neighborhood as a major candidate for work in the year 2000. The City Council ordered a feasibility report on the Ingerson project, which was received by the City Council in November, 1999. The City Council then ordered an informational meeting to be held on November 29, 1999 at which thrce Councilmembers attended. Staff then mailed public notices of this evening's public hearing to all affected residents and placed notices in the City's official newspaper. Mr. Stafford invited the City Engineer to provide an overview ofthe rating process and feasibility report and present the proposed project. Mr. Brown presented an overview of the rating process and how the Ingerson neighborhood was selected to be reconstructed and alternatives for the reconstruction. He stated that the City of Arden Hills performed the rating on all neighborhoods south of Highway 694. These were the older neighborhoods within the City and predominately the neighborhoods with the most needs. Once the rating was completed, the streets were grouped into neighborhoods and ranked on an individual basis and on a neighborhood composite basis. The items reviewed included: . The condition of the pavement. . The existing drainage problems. Mr. Brown stated that the drainage issues were a major factor in the Ingerson neighborhood. - Water quality. Mr. Brown stated that the quality of any water draining into a natural water body, such as the wetlands and lakes, without water treatment was considered. . The existing condition of the water mains and sanitary sewer lines. . Conformity of streets to current standards. Once the individual streets were reviewed, they were grouped into neighborhoods. Twenty to thirty neighborhoods had been identified south ofI-lighway 694. The Ingerson neighborhood is bound by Lexington Avenue, Old Highway 51, Lake Josephine and wetlands and commercial area to the north. The reasons the Ingerson neighborhood was at the top of the list for reconstruction were: ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 8 . - The age of the streets: The original construction of the streets in this neighborhood occurred around the 1960's. Four of the streets were overlaid approximately 10 years ago and the life of an overlay was considered to be five to seven years. The surface ratings of the asphalt ranged from very poor to good. The composite rating was 55, which was the lowest ofthe neighborhoods that were reviewed. · The drainage evaluation: The Ingerson neighborhood had the worst surface drainage evaluation of all the neighborhoods that were reviewed. Routine ponding occurs in the streets and all the water runoff currently runs directly into Lake Josephine and Lake Johanna without any treatment. In order to mitigate this problems, ponding sites had been identified on a preliminary basis tlmt would allow the water quality issues to be addressed. The intent would be to construction ponds west of I-1amline Avenue and in the ravine area from F emwood Avenue to Lake Josephine. This neighborhood was a good candidate to control water quality issues. Mr. Brown stated that the ranking system that was developed was based on the function of the street. One issue was if whether the water runs away from the pavement so as not to destroy the integrity of the pavement. This was the ranking that received a score of 110. The second factor was whether the water flowing trom the neighborhood was running treated or untreated into a natural body of water. In this ncighborhood, none of the water is treated by filtration ponds prior to running into the lakes and wetlands. . Mayor Probst asked that the audience allow the presentation to be completed prior to asking questions. Mr. Brown stated that the final reason the Ingerson neighborhood was at the top of the list for reconstruction was nonconformity to the City street standards. The majority of the streets in this neighborhood do not conform to the current City standards. Mr. Brown stated that the proposed improvements to the neighborhood were: - Reconstruct Carlton Drive, Fernwood Road, Fernwood Court, Ingerson Avenue, Ingerson Court, North I-1amline Avenue south ofIngerson Avenue and Cannon Avenue. Mr. Brown stated that a number of alternatives were being considered in conj unction with this reconstruction. The reconstruction of these streets would include curb and gutter installation and bituminous paving with a sand sub-base and draining tile. . To address the water quality issues, one or two ponds were proposed on the west side of I-1amline Avenue, as well as improvements to the Fernwood Court channel. The improvements to the channel would include deepening the existing channel to Lake Josephine and the construction of a weir at the channel outlet to the lake, thereby increasing the cleansing affect of the channel on storm water runofT prior to entering Lake Josephine. . Mr. Brown stated that the proposed reconstruction project considered the possible vacation of I-1amline Avenue between Ingerson Avenue and Tiller Lane. He indicated that this was the poorest stretch of street in the neighborhood. Additionally, this portion of Hamline Avenue runs adjacent to a wetland and reconstruction of this street would be more costly than any of the other streets. Additionally, there are no accessible properties on this portion ofI-lamline Avenue. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 9 . Anothcr option being considercd with this proj ect was to turn Tiller Lane and Cannon Avenue into cul-de-sacs. Financially, this option did not make sense because the cost to construct the cul-de-sacs would be more than rcconstructing Cannon Avenue. The City Engineer was recommending that the City not pursue this alternative. The project also included a possible rcconsideration of the street widths. The standard street width for the City was 32 feet, face to face. Based on maintenance, engineering, driving and parking needs, 28 feet could be considered by the City Council in some cases and 24 feet for the cul-de-sacs. Ingerson Avenue and Hamline Avenue are both State Aid roads and the minimum allowable width for State Aid was 28 feet, providing that parking is banned from both sides of the streets. With regard to the concerns of speed on Ingerson Avenue, Mr. Brown stated that stop signs could be incorporated at the intersection of Fernwood Road and Ingerson Avenue. Speed bumps had been considered, however, he would recommend against speed bumps. He indicated that street width was a factor in traffic speed and this would have to be considered. Mr. Brown stated that the scope of the pond improvements had been included as alternatives because there was a wide range of possibilities. Ideally, the ponds would be constructed to NURP standards under which there is a formula which calculates the size of pond needed according to the amount of land that drains to it. When a pond is built to NURP standards it reduces the amount of pollution running into the natural water bodies down stream by approximately 60 to 80 percent. The Rice Creek Watershed District uses these standards for all new construction. . Mr. Brown stated that the forces against building the proposed ponds to NURP standards would be the impact to the trees, wetlands and other natural vegetation. The intent would be to construct ponds that clean the runoff water without impacting the natural area. It may be possible to meet the NURP standards by building the ponds as close to Highway 52 as possible. It may also be possible to design the ponds to weave around the existing trees in the low areas. Mr. Brown stated that the Rice Creek Watershed District and the neighborhood will be heavily involved in deternlining the trade-offs of these options. With regard to the Fernwood channel, Mr. Brown stated that the channel was located in an area between developed lots. The Association has ownership over part of the channel and uses it for access to the lake. The scope of work on the channel will be subject to involvement ofthe Association, the water quality needs of the Rice Creek Watershed, and the neighborhood impacts and aesthetics. Mr. Brown presented the current City street standards for a typical street and the reasons for these standards. . Mr. Brown stated that the standard width for a two way street was 32 feet face to face, which allows for parking on both sides. The two-way traffic on a 32-foot street is limited by eight-foot lanes. Parking on both sides of a 32-foot street generally results in slower traffic. The City standards allow for eight to 10 feet on either side of the right-of-way. The publicly owned right- ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10, 2000 10 . ot~way extends] 4 feet into residential property. This space is used to allow for the installation of private or City utilities. Mr. Brown stated that the City street standards called for four to six inches of asphalt pavement. Below the pavement is eight to 12 inches of crushed rock with approximately 12 inches of sand below that. The existing streets primarily include two to four inches of pavement, a few inches of rock and at times no sand sub base. The 12 inches of sand is used to direct water from underneath the road. One of the biggest enemies of streets was water that freezes and thaws creating heaving of the road. If the water is kept away Irom the roadway, the heaving problem is eliminated. Also included in the City street standards was curb and gutters and concrete driveway aprons. The concrete driveway aprons allow for a nice transition from the driveways to the streets. The aprons also keep the water in the streets rather than in the yards. Some developments include the use of surmountable curbs. Thc curbing included in the City standards was more vertical for maintenance purposes, such as plowing. Additionally, the more vertical curbs carry water better than surmountable curbs. Not included in the proposal for the Ingerson neighborhood was concrete sidewalks, bituminous trails, additional landscaping (other than around the ponds), street lighting, concrete road pavemcnt or parking lanes. Additionally, ditches adjacent to the roads were not proposed due to limited space and existing trees. . Mr. Brown explained the construction process of the proposed ponds. He indicated that the intent was to get as much volume in the pond as possible within the geographic constraints of tbe site. More volume in the ponds results in more settlement of sand and silt and cleaner water running into lakes and wetlands. Mr. Brown reviewed the proposed costs of the street reconstruction project. He stated that the total cost was projected at approximately 2.2 million dollars. This estimate included the bid, engineering, administration and lcgal cost, as well as overhead costs. The actual bid was expected to be approximately 25 percent less than the estimated total cost. The road reconstruction alone was estimatcd at approximately 1.6 million dollars. The storm sewer improvements were estimated at approximately $370,000 and the ponding at approximately $175,000. Mr. Brown presented the proposed funding for the project as follows: . General Fund: $440,000 . City Street Fund: $130,000 . Storm Water Utility Fund: $350,000 - Rice Creek Water Shed District: $100,000 . State Aid Funds: $630,000 . - Property Assessments: $519,000 ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10, 2000 11 . With regard to funding by Rice Creek Watershed District, Mr. Brown stated that the District had a cost share program and was expected to help fund up to $50,000 per pond, subject to tinal approval by the District. Mr. Brown presented the average total cost per foot for reconstruction of a street as follows: - Removal and grading: - Sand sub base and drainage tile: . Rock and asphalt: . Curb and gutter: . Storm sewer: . Restoration and sodding: Total: $ 16.00 per foot $ 30.00 per toot $100.00 per toot $ 8.00 per foot $ 35.00 per foot $ 20.00 per foot $217.00 per foot The driveway apron was estimated to cost approximately $750 to $1,000 per house. Mr. Brown reviewcd the schedule of the 2000 Street Improvement Project. He stated that an informational meeting had been held on November 29, 1999 and the public hearing was being held this evening. If the City chooses to move forward with the project, the design period will run from January to April of2000. The assessment hearing would be held at the end of the design process in April or May of 2000. Bids would be opened in June or July of 2000 and construction would begin in September or October of2000. . Councilmember Larson stated that he had a number questions to ask. However, he did not want to delay to public comments and suggested that the Council comments be made after the public hearing. Mr. Tom Lynch, 3220 North Hamline A venue, stated that he had been asked by the neighborhood committee to read a statement to the City CounciL Mayor Probst stated that a number ofresidents had signed up to speak this evening and suggested that these people be allowed to speak first. An audience member stated that a list of speakers with specific presentations had been provided to the City statf He asked that this list be followed first to allow the intormation to be presented in an organized manner. Mr. Tom Lynch read a letter to the Council that was entered into the record. Mr. Tom Lynch stated that the residents had specific issues they would like to address, beginning with Ally Biggs. Mayor Probst asked how many people were planning to present statements to the City CounciL Ms. Swanson stated that the City staff had the list of residents prepared to make presentations. Mayor Probst asked that, if there were any residents wishing to address the Council who will have to leave the meeting early, they be allowed to speak first. . Mr. Brian Turnquist, 1302 Cannon Avenue, spoke against the project related to standard street width requirements. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 12 Mr. Jack Lindberg, 1136 Carlton Drive, presented a letter for consideration, speaking against the project's process to-date. Mr. Jim Cox, 1287 Ingerson Avenue, spoke against the project, related to possible conflict of interest concerns by Mayor Probst. Mayor Probst brought the meeting back to order and asked that the comments be limited to the proposed street improvement project. Councilmember Larson addressed comments regarding any alleged conflict of interest concerns by the City Council and the City's consulting engineering firnl. Mr. Nathan Kathir, 1148 Carlton Drive, stated that he was a licensed practicing Civil Engineer. He indicated that most residents would feel better if one engineering firm performed the assessment analysis and another perfomled the design work of the project. There is often a great deal of subjective thought that goes into the process and two minds are better than one. An unidentified audience member noted that the presentation had suggested that the major problem with this neighborhood was the drainage. However, the majority of the project cost would go towards road reconstruction. He felt that the majority ofthe money should be spent on repairing the primary problem,. An unidentified audience member stated that he moved to this neighborhood nine years and eight months ago. He chose the City of Arden Hills because it was a smaller community. When asked how thc traffic is in his neighborhood, he responds by saying that only the people who live the neighborhood and those who are lost use the streets. Given the volume of traffic in the neighborhood, he felt that the ratings may not warrant reconstruction at this time. An unidentified audience membcr statcd that, with the exception ofIngerson Avenue, most of the streets in his neighborhood do not have a speeding problem. The speeding problem on Ingerson A venuc could be dealt with by posting speed limit signs and enforcing them. He stated that his neighborhood does not need sidcwalks or curbs and gutters. What the neighborhood needs is speed limit signs that are enforced. An unidentified audience member stated that he was not opposed to the proposed improvements. However, the City and the neighborhood needed more time to consider the improvements and present a better solution. He added that there was only two to three houses affected by the ponding in the street. Ms. Ally Biggs, 1135 Ingerson Road, presented the City Council with a petition from the neighborhood that was taken after the November 29, 1999 meeting. The residents put together a core group of representatives that petitioned all ofthe 92 affected lots in the neighborhood. Of the 92 residents petitioned, 69 stated that they were opposed to the proposed plan. Two of the residents were in favor of the proposed plans. One was willing to support the proposal to avoid a fight with the City. Nine of the residents were undecided and wanted more information. Twelve of the residents could not be reached. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 13 With regard to the concern that the City Council was not invited to the neighborhood meeting, Ms. Biggs stated that this was not an effort to oppose the CounciL She indicated that the residents were not given enough time to put together a proposal during the holiday season. The residents found another City that had recently been through a similar process and was successful in its results. This was the reason the Mayor of Mounds View had been invited to the neighborhood meeting. This was not an attempt on the part of the Mounds View Mayor to one- up the City of Arden Hills' CounciL The Mayor of Mounds View was very helpful and was instrumental in the residents being well prepared for this public hearing. Ms. Biggs stated that the neighborhood wanted to work with the City to determine the best way to move forward with the improvement project without harming the properties. Ms. Biggs stated that she was extremely concerned about the speed on Ingerson Avenue. She indicated that the residents requested that a study be done by the Sheriff Department. She was convinced that if her street was widened, and the portion of Hamline A venue was closed off, the tramc between Snelling Avenue and Lexington Avenue will definitely increase. Mayor Probst stated that setting the speed limits required a study of the current average speed. The City has received requests from other neighborhoods to reduce speed limits. When the speed limit is studied, the speed limit is set at 85 percent of the average speed of traffic on the street. Often times this results in the speed limits being increased rather than decreased. An audience member asked if this was based on a law. Mayor Probst stated that this was a required process to evaluate speed limits. Ms. Evonne Wilken, 1225 Ingerson Avenue, stated that the neighborhood representatives prepared a survey which was distributed to 97 residents in the neighborhood that would be affected by the proposed road construction. She noted that, due to the time limit, only 45 percent of the surveys had been collected. She presented the results ofthis survey, a copy of which was provided to the City Council. Ms. Wilken stated that the final survey results would be presented to the City Council once they have all been received. She asked that the City Council slow down this process in order for the residents to learn more about the project. She did not want to see her neighborhood drastically changed. Mayor Probst asked if the objections to curbs and gutters were based upon the cost to construct them. Ms. Wilken stated that the majority ofthe objections to curbs and gutters were based on the fact that the aesthetics and feel of the neighborhood would be changed. Although the neighborhood was concerned about the cost of the project, the majority do not want the rural atmosphere of the neighborhood to change. Mr. Howard Hoss, 1138 Ingerson Avenue, stated that the residents were hoping to work with the City cooperatively for the development of the neighborhood. He indicated that there were many people in the neighborhood who serve on City committees and the Association has joined with the City Council and is anxious to be involved with the City Council on this important project. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 14 . Mr. Hoss stated that the neighborhood would like the opportunity to review the information presented this evening before decisions are made. More time was needed to carefully assess the information. Ms. Christine Leavit, 1213 Ingerson Avenue, spoke against the project as it related to potential increased speed with wider streets, and also that drainage concerns were not significant to substantiate curb and gutter. Mr. John Schmidt, 1127 Ingerson Avenue, spoke against the project as it related to the closing of Hamline Avenue north ofIngerson Avenue. Mr. Dave Wilken, 1225 Ingerson Avenue, spoke against the project with its existing drainage corrcctions and potential costs. Ms. Linda Swanson, 1124 Ingerson Avenue, addressed possible altemative drainage options to eliminate the need for curb and gutter installation. Mr. Steve Freimuth, 1200 Ingerson Road, addressed concems regarding street parking; street widths; options for curb and gutter installation; drainage concerns; and traffic speeds. Ms. Leslie Reinhold, 1233 Ingerson Avenue, addressed environmental and drainage issues; street widths; endangering existing trees with potential construction; and the possible necd for an . Environmental Assessment Worksheet and/or Environmental Impact Statemcnt. Mr. Brown stated that the trees along Hamline Avenue were not anticipatcd to be affected by the proposed pond A. Although a linal survey has not been completed, it appeared as though there was more room to build pond A than initially believed. Mr. Dick Hanson, 3254 North Hamline Avenue, addressed concerns regarding the City's use of only one engineering firm for project recommendations. Ms. Dorothy Vaughter, 1226 Ingerson Avenue, addressed concerns regarding future special assessments as they related to the City's standard 32 foot street width, requested additional information regarding increased market values and property benefits; and sought clarification on property foot estimates. Mayor Probst stated that the City had a formal assessment policy that has been in place for approximately 10 years. The method of assessment is discussed virtually every year and the Operations Committee has reviewed the policy at least twice. The last timc the Committee reviewed the policy, they held the position that the current policy was reasonable and equitable and the only change that was recommended was in the calculations for irregular and corner lots. Mayor Probst stated that the construction standards of the City that dictated street widths was a policy established by the City Council and can be changed by the Council. . Mayor Probst stated that there was clearly a sense on the part of the residents that the proposal was a done deal and the City was ready to begin work in the Ingerson neighborhood. I-Ie indicated that this was not the case. The City was following the prescribed process in terms of . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 15 determining whether the project was feasible and how it could be funded. He indicated that there have been a number of projects throughout the City that had been modified prior to approval by the City Council. If the Council chooses to move forward with reconstruction of the Ingerson neighborhood, he anticipated that there will be a number of changes to what was presented in the feasibility report. Mr. Tom Lynch stated that the nonprofit organization, The Little Brothers, owned the largest piece of property in the Ingerson neighborhood and would be assessed over $25,000. He asked that the Executive Director, Ms. Therese King, address this issue. Ms. Therese King, Executive Director representing the nonprofit organization, Little Brothers of the Elderly, owned substantial property that would be assessed. Ms. King briefly reviewed the mission of her organization that provides services to isolated and lonely elderly persons since 1972. She was concerned this evening about the property known as the Bradford property. She indicated that John Bradford donated a beautiful piece of land with a lovely house and library to The Little Brothers many years ago. The organization has used this property for many events which provide a get-away vacation for the elderly who are stuck in the inner-city. Birthday parties and other special events are also held at this property and the property allows the elderly to experience country life. She felt that the City of Arden Hills has the best of both worlds being a beautiful rural area in close proximity to the Twin Cities. She did not understand why this rural character would have to change and become more city like. She stated that this was not why John Bradford donated the property or why the residents live in this neighborhood. Ms. King stated that, ifthe City Council pursues this reconstruction proposal, they would be changing a way of life. With regard to the proposed assessment, Ms. King stated that there would be no way The Little Brothers could afford to pay $25,000. Mr. Tom Lynch addressed concerns regarding the former jurisdiction by Ramsey County prior to 1996 of Hamline Avenue and Ingerson Avenue; and their state of construction at the time of the turnback and their current condition. Mr. Willheim Reinhold, 1233 Ingerson Avenue, spoke regarding drainage issues. Ms. Swanson concluded the presentation by residents with several comments. Ms. Swanson noted that residents recognize that at times roadways need to undergo improvements. However, what the City was currently proposing will be detrimental to the neighborhood cnvironmentally, aesthetically and financially and will be irreversible. The residents request tllat this project, as well as all other roadway projects in Arden Hills be postponed. This will allow the City Council, the City Engineer, the Public Works Director and residents to meet and work together to come up with recommendations that will be beneficial to the City as a whole as well as to the residents. This will allow for open dialog and education for all individuals involved. The delay will allow the City Council to review alternative methods to meet City objectives and will allow the Council to invcstigate whether a drainage problem exists in the neighborhood and to what extent. Such a study would give insight as to what should or should not be done to rectify the problem, if a problem exists. All these requests will allow a smooth transition to the implementation of all future projects. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 16 Ms. Swanson stated that the residents believe the loss of property, the potential detrimental environmental ramifications and the loss of neighborhood aesthetics was not worth the small amount of money available through Municipal State Aid funding. In the short amount of time that the residents have had to learn about roadways, they have come to realize that the most economical and effective means of dealing with surface water is to allow the water to soak naturally into the soil and allow it to naturally be clcansed of its impurities. The residents want the City Council to look at alternatives that have already been tried and found beneficially, such as rain gardens. The residents were not asking the Council to break a mold and be the innovator of new concepts. Ms. Swanson noted that according to the feasibility report, the reconstruction costs included traffic control with a unit price of $25,000 and signage for a total of $2,400 per street. She askcd what type of traffic control and signage the City was proposing and where the City proposed to construct them. Mr. Brown stated that the traffic control was proposed only during the construction pcriod and was not a permanent featurc. He indicated that the cost shown in the feasibility for traffic control was a total of $25,000 for all streets. Other than the current proposed plan, Ms. Swanson asked what alternative plans had been investigated by the City Council. Mayor Probst stated that the City has not investigated other plans. Ms. Swanson asked when the residents will receive an itemized breakdown for all project expenditures. Mayor Probst statcd that an itemization will be available when the final details of the project are determined. Ms. Swanson asked ifthere will be an itemized breakdown for each resident Mayor Probst stated that there will not be a breakdown for each resident. Ms. Swanson asked who will cover the costs of the proposed ponding if the City does not receive additional funding from the Rice Creek Watershed District. Mayor Probst stated that the City would either have to back off on part of the project or find other City funds. I-Ie indicated that thc basis of the assessments was a hypothetical 32 foot wide street and the assessments were for less than one-quarter of the total project cost. Councilmember Larson stated that there was a misunderstanding regarding how the assessments were calculated. He has heard it stated that the assessments were paying for the storm water retention ponds and other aspects of this project. He stated that the assessments were based on the cost of street improvements only. It is the policy of Arden Hills to assess 50 percent of the cost for street reconstruction and, in this case the assessments represent less than one-half of the street improvement costs. He noted that the 1998 street assessments had been $39.99 per foot. Ms. Swanson noted that the other City funds that may be used to pay for portions of the project would essentially be the resident's money. Councilmember Larson agreed that all the money being spent is the City's money and comes out of many different funds. However, the money being assessed was for street improvements only and reiterated that the assessment for this ncighborhood was for less than 50 percent of the street improvement costs. Ms. King notcd that the proposed assessments would be for one-forth of the total project cost. Councilmember Larson agreed, however, he statcd that the assessments wcrc based on the street ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 17 . improvement costs only, This project involved much more than street improvements and included money from other City funds as well as assessments on property owners, Ms, Swanson stated that according to the 1999 Municipal State Aid Needs Report, Arden Hills' 1999 adjusted construction needs for all MSA designated roads was $4,982,288, Of this amount, under the MSA needs value formula, Arden Hills will only receive approximately $116,780. Marshall Johnston, Manager of the MSA Needs Unit advised her that the 1999 adj usted construction needs for Hamline Avenue was $261,129, Under the actual MSA needs value formula, Arden Hills will only receive approximately $6,270, The 1999 adjusted construction needs for Ingerson A venue was $327,824. Under the actual MSA needs value formula Arden Hills will only receive approximately $7,867. Assuming this to be true, Ms, Swanson asked where the City came up with the Minnesota Department of Transportation State Aid of$630,000 as stated on page eight of the feasibility report. Ms. Brown stated that State Aid funds for the City were calculated based on all the State Aid routes within the City, Each of these roads has a needs account with the State of Minnesota. Each year, the State allows a certain amount of money based on the conditions of the streets, Each year, the City of Arden Hills receives approximately $200,000 in construction funds, The City is at liberty to spend these funds on any State Aid street. The City currently has a balance of approximately $430,000 which, added to the $200,000 that the City receives annually, totaled the $630,000 of State Aid proposed to be used for this project. The City can also borrow against future State Aid construction funds. . Ms, Biggs asked if all of the City's current construction funds will be spent on Ingerson A venue. Mr. Brown stated that this money can be spent on any State Aid road, Ms, Biggs asked how much of the City's construction funds will be spent on this project. Mr. Brown stated that the proposal was to spend the entire balance ofthe construction funds. Ms. Swanson stated that Mr. Johnston of the State Aid Needs Unit had indicated that the City of Arden Hills would only be granted $116,780. Mr. Brown stated that the flmds being referred to were for maintenance, He indicated that the City of Arden Hills receives approximately two- thirds of its construction funds in a maintenance fund, Ms. Swanson asked when the City Council will meet to make their decision on this proposal and when the residents will be notificd of this decision, Mayor Probst stated that once the public hearing was closed the Council will discuss how they wish to proceed. Ms, Swanson confirmed that the public hearing will be closed. Mayor Probst stated that this was correct. Ms, Swanson asked if the City Council will then mcct privately, Mayor Probst stated that the City Council will have its discussion in the Council chambers and will not meet privately. He stated that the residcnts were wclcome to remain during these discussions, . Mr. Cox asked if the meeting will be video tapped during the Council discussions. Mayor Probst stated that the discussions will be video taped. Mr. Cox stated that he had been informed that the video tapes were erased at the end of each meeting. Mayor Probst stated that the video tapes of the Council meetings were not archived indefinitely. He indicated that since the meetings were not broadcast live on television, the City has been video taping the meetings. These video tapes ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 18 . are brought to the library and are available for a period oftime. After a certain amount of time, the video tapes are brought back to the City and reused. Ms. Swanson asked if all City Council discussions were held in a public forum. Mayor Probst stated that the City Councilmembers were not allowed to meet privately, with the exception of limited legal issues. If the City Council does not make a decision this evening, Ms. Swanson asked if the residents would have to follow the City Council to their Council meetings in order to hear the discussions. Mayor Probst stated that the project discussion would be added to the agenda of a future Council meeting. He indicated that the options that the City Council had this evening were to proceed with the proposal as is, make modifications to the proposal, or table or postpone the project. Ms. Swanson asked what newspaper will publish the assessment hearing notices. Mayor Probst stated that the assessment hearing notices will be published in the Bulletin. Additionally, all affected property owners will be sent notification of the hearing. Ms. Swanson stated that she was aware of at least two individuals that did not receive notice of this public hearing. Mayor Probst stated that this would be corrected. . Ms. Swanson asked if anyone has approached the City about developing the land behind the pump house on Ingerson Avenue. Mr. Stafford stated that an individual from Rochester, Minnesota inforn1ed the City that he had purchased that property. The City attempted to send this individual a public bearing notice, however, the notice was sent back. The City staff was not certain who owns this property, however, an individual was asking for information regarding the location of sewer and water services and the dimensions of the lot. Mr. Doug Hartford, 1232 Ingerson Avenue, seconded the comments made by his neighbors and further commented on the information contained in the Feasibility Study; official notification of the affected property owners; and correction of footages for his property. Mr. David Dudic, 1226 Ingerson Avenue, stated that he was concerned about the overall impact of the road reconstruction project on the aesthetics of the Ingerson neighborhood. With regard to the concern of property loss, Mayor Probst stated that Mr. Dudic's lot size would not be diminished, although the dimensions from the edge of the street to the property line may change. If the City did need to obtain right-of-way, this land would have to be obtained prior to proceeding with the project. He was not aware of any location within this neighborhood where additional right-of-way was needed. . Mayor Probst stated that the City of Arden Hills has 30 miles of street and it costs approximately onc million dollars per mile to reconstruct those streets. The City does not have the financial ability to perform road reconstruction on an annual basis. Therefore, on behalf of the residents, the City has attempted to formulate a plan over a period of time to keep up with the maintenance of the infrastructure. Mr. Dave Fritz, 1119 Ingerson A venue, addressed the proposed "channel" on Lake Josephine Association property and right-of:way concerns. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 19 Mr. Cox stated that a new City of Mounds View law stated that before action is taken on any street planning there would be a three-year process to study and validate whether the engineering tirm has presented all the options. This evening a substantially less expensive option was presented that the Engineering firm did not discuss. He asked what protocol must be followed to have the same three-year law passed in Arden Hills. Mayor Probst stated that this was a City Council policy and indicated that the residents could lobby the City Council to change its policy. Ms. Biggs requested that each of the Councilmembers drive through her neighborhood in order to ",itness what the residents were concerned about. Councilmember Aplikowski asked Ms. Biggs if she really thought that the Councilmembers have not already done this. Ms. Biggs stated that she had not seen anyone in the neighborhood and would like for the Councilmembers to meet the residents and be shown around the neighborhood. Councilmember Grant stated that he had been in the neighborhood and talked with a couple of residents who had recognized him. Councilmember Aplikowski stated that she had visited the neighborhood four times in the past month. Councilmember Larson stated that he had walked and driven every street in the Ingerson neighborhood twice. Mr. Robert Woodburn, 1220 Ingerson Court, spoke in favor of the project, and addressed the ponding problems that the City had been aware of for over twenty-five years and elevation calculations; road width studies related to traffic speed; and Hamline Avenue and Ingerson Court comments regarding proposed vacation and reconstruction respectively. Mr, Brown stated that one option for improving the channel would be to dig out some added space. However, there would be implications with trees and cover. The other option would be to raise the level, presuming this could be done without flooding Fernwood Court. Ms. Leslie Reinhold spoke further against the project as it related to water quality issues and neighborhood aesthetics, as well as the notification process. Ms. Kay Stedman, 1164 Ingerson Avenue, stated that the City of Roseville may be interested in what the City of Arden Hills was doing with water draining into Lake Josephine. Mr. Brown stated that the City of Roseville is aware of the plans and that he speaks with representatives of the City of Roseville on a frequent basis. Ms. Stedman stated that she opposes wider streets. Mr. Freimuth asked ifthe City would lose its State Aid money ifit were not used. Mayor Probst stated that there was a point at which the City can lose the State Aid money if it is not used. Mr. Freimuth stated that if the City does not lose the State Aid funds and can wait until the road breaks up betore reconstruction, nothing would be lost. Mayor Probst noted that there may be the risk of construction costs going up. He indicated that he has served on the City Council for seven years and during the first year of the Pavement Management program the assessment was approximately $30 per foot. This year the assessment was being proposed at $45 per foot, which ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10, 2000 20 . was actually less than prescribed by the assessment policy. He wanted the residents to understand that this figure will not go down, rather it will continue to rise. The risk that exists if this project is put on hold, and another project takes its place, it may take the City a long time to be able to afford its reconstruction. Ms. Swanson stated that the benefit to waiting one year for this rcconstruction project would be to learn if the entire scope of the project was necessary, if there would be any ramifications to the project, if there were other options. Additionally, all the people involved will learn more about thc process. She stated that it was obvious that there was a large number of people who oppose the current plan. With regard to the issue of delaying this project, Councilmember Larson stated that there were a number of future projects being considered by the City. Two years from now the City will most likely be involved in another pavement project in another part of Arden Hills. When the City misscs one year, everything else is pushed back. As time goes on and roads deteriorate the City loses time by delaying one project. . An audience member stated that if other roads within the City of Arden Hills were in better shape than those in the Ingerson neighborhood, it would not be harmful for these projects to be delayed as well. Councilmember Larson stated that certain projects have been identified for two years from now and what happens now will affect what is accomplished down the road. An audience member suggested that the City begin involving the residents of the other neighborhoods that are scheduled to be reconstructed. She added that she would much rather pay more for a project that she had been involved with and trusted the process, knowing that her fellow citizens had a real voice in the decision making process. Ms. Biggs noted that this may also provide the opportunity for residents who may wish to move rather than pay for an assessment. An audience member asked how many streets within Arden Hills were currently 32 feet wide. Mr. Brown stated that approximately two-thirds of the City streets have curb and gutters and approximately 70 to 80 percent oftllose are 32 feet wide. He indicated that the narrowest street with curbs and gutters was 24 feet wide. Mr. Tom Lynch stated that this public hearing should have been held eight months ago. Mayor Probst stated that the City did not have the feasibility study eight months ago. He stated that the City was doing its best to keep the neighborhood as up to speed as the City Council. He added that legal notices cannot be sent until the feasibility study has been completed. Mr. Woodburn congratulated the City Council and thanked the Council for listening to the residents. He felt that thc City had notified the residents properly and noted that there have been two public meetings on this issue. Mayor Probst closed the public hearing at 11 :03 p.m., as no onc else wished to address the City Council. . Councilmember Aplikowski stated that a great deal of work has gone into this proposal and the intent of the City Council was never to put the residents through an upsetting process. It was her beliefthat in the time that she has served 011 the Council the entire process has improved. When ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10, 2000 21 . she first became a Councilmemher the only notice the residents received was for the assessment hearing. The amount of mistrust cxpressed at the beginning of thi s meeting was very distressful to her. She stated that the City staff and Engineering Ilrm worked very hard to provide the residents with good facts. Councilmember Aplikowski stated that the City Pavement Management Plan was at least 10 years old. However, many of the residents acted as though they did not know that the Pavement Management Plan existed. She indicated that information regarding the Pavement Management Plan and assessment policy has been published in the City newspaper and she felt that this process should not come as a surprise to the residents. She felt that the City Council may have to do something about this issue. She applauded the residents for the efforts made to be prepared this evening and she hoped that the City and residcnts can work together to resolve the trust issucs. She indicated that the Councilmembers were elected by the residents of Arden Hills because the residents felt as though they could trust them. She added that very few of the residents took the time to call the City after the November 29, 1999 informational meeting Councilmember Aplikowski stated that she does prefer the addition of curbs and gutters when a road is recycled. However, this does not mean that she can not or will not change her mind. Councilmember Grant commended the residents for the amount work that they put into this evening's meeting and for being very organized. He indicated that he was new on the Council and the majority of this plan had been done prior to his being appointed. . Mayor Probst stated that the request before the City Council was to take some action on the proposed street improvements to the Ingerson neighborhood. The Council has the options of doing nothing, postponing the discussions, ordering additional work, modifying the proposed improvements, or ordering the work as presented. Councilmember Larson stated that he had received comments from residents who believe that the assessments were incorrect because the amount of street frontage did not match what they believed their actual frontage to be. He discussed this issue with Mr. Stafford and it was his understanding that the assessment policy did not simply reflect the street frontage since the amount of frontage depends upon the lot shape. He asked Mr. Stafford to further explain the considerations of the City assessment policy. Mr. Stafford explained that, for example, with a pie shaped lot located on a cul-de-sac with a street frontage of 50 feet and a rear lot line of ISO feet, the assessment policy considers the average of these two figures. Councilmember Larson confirmed that the total amount of frontage for assessment purposes was the average of the front and rear lot widths. Mr. Stafford stated that this was correct. . Mr. Post stated that the philosophy behind the assessment policy for oddly shaped lots was to normalize those lots. Mayor Probst noted that for a typical rectangular lot with 100 feet of street frontage, the assessment would be based on that 100 feet and the assessment policy has a section that deals with odd shaped lots and corner lots. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 22 Mayor Probst stated that all the information regarding lot sizes and shapes come from Ramsey County records and it was possible that there was an error in these records. It was also possible that when the assessments were ligured for this project an error in calculations was made. He indicated that as the City goes through the assessment hearing process such errors would be corrected. Councilmember Larson noted that the total estimated cost for this project was 2.2 million dollars. He confirmed that the basis of the assessments was for the street improvements only. Mr. Brown stated that this was correct. Councilmember Larson requested confirmation that if the retention ponds were eliminated from the project, it would not affect the dollar amount ofthe proposed assessments. Mr. Brown stated that this was correct. Councilmember Larson asked ifthe proposed assessments would be affected by the inclusion of Hamline Avenue in the reconstruction project. Mr. Brown stated that the reconstruction of Hamline Avenue would add an addition $154,200 to the project cost. Councilmember Larson confirmed that the street improvements paid for by assessments would not include the utilities under the road. Mr. Brown stated that the utility improvements would be paid for by other Public Works funds. Mayor Probst noted that the City could choose to assess the sewer improvements. However, in this case the City chose to fund the sewer improvements with other utility funds. Council member Larson asked what the current classification was oflngerson Avenue. Mr. Brown stated that Ingerson Avenue was currently a local collector street. Councilmember Larson asked what the classification was of the other streets in the neighborhood. Mr. Brown stated that, other than the two cul-de-sacs, that the majority of the roads in this neighborhood were local through streets. Councilmember Larson noted that at a prior meeting there had been a great deal of discussion regarding the ditch that runs underneath Snelling Avenue. He asked who was responsible for the maintenance of this ditch. Mr. Brown stated that the responsibility of this ditch has passed between the Rice Creek Watershed District and Ramsey County. Mr. Stafford stated that Ramsey County performed most of the work on this ditch. Mr. Brown noted that the current proposal did not include any changes to this ditch. If the Council chose to move forward with this project, Councilmember Larson asked what the process will be to determine the actual assessments. Mayor Probst stated that the City Engineers have historically provided the City ",ith an estimated cost for a standard 32 foot wide street and this estimate it translated into a relativc assessment based on the cost per square footage. The City Council then decides the actual assessment amount. Historically, the City Council has tended to agree with the assessment amount provided by the City Engineer. However, in this case the Council has chosen to reduce the proposed assessment amount. Councilmember Larson confirmed that the actual amount of the assessments would be determined after the final specifications of the project have been determined. Mayor Probst stated that this was correct. Councilmember Larson asked what would happen ifthe actual bids were significantly lower than the estimates. Mayor Probst stated that the City of Arden Hills establishes the assessment rates prior to proceeding with the project. If the actual project costs . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10, 2000 23 are higher than the estimate, additional funds would come from the General Fund. If the actual project costs are lower than the estimate then the excess funds go into the General Fund. He noted that some other communities determine the assessment rates after completion of the projects with the assessments being based on actual costs. Councilmember Aplikowski asked if there were other projects waiting to be started if the City does not move forward with this reconstruction project. Mr. Brown stated that there were other neighborhoods in the southern part of the City that were at a level of deterioration to justifY reconstruction. He indicated that one of these neighborhoods could be slated for reconstruction. Mayor Probst noted that a feasibility study has not been done for any other neighborhood at this time. Mr. Brown concurred and added that it was unlikely that any other project would begin this year. Councilmember Aplikowski stated that she was tempted to suggest that the City pull this project off the board completely. However, if this was done, this project would be placed at the bottom of the list. Mayor Probst stated it was obvious that the City was not prepared to proceed with this project as currently proposed. He felt it would not be appropriate to attempt to redesign the project at this time. He was not certain how to proceed at this point, however, modifications clearly needed to be made according to the input received this evening. He suspected that once the project is modified there will still be some disagreements on the part of the residents. He noted that historically, the City has attempted to prioritize the worst streets based on their pavement ratings and reconstruct those streets individually. The problem with this method was that one street had been reconstructed with an assessment cost of$30 per foot and a neighboring street was reconstructed one year later with an assessment cost of$35 per foot. Additionally, there had been issues with the construction equipment being back in the same neighborhood. As a matter of policy, the City Council is now trying to manage the Pavement Management Plan on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis. The streets in the Ingerson neighborhood had been identified collectively as a starting point for the southern portion of the City. Councilmember Rem stated that given the comments made this evening she was in favor of postponing the project for at least one year. However, she was not in favor of delaying the project indefinitely and moving it to the bottom ofthe list. She understood the reluctance of the neighborhood to move forward with the reconstruction project and felt strongly that it would be helpful if the neighborhood received better notification. She suggested that the project be revisited in the spring time when the concerns about drainage can be looked at closely. She also suggested that the project be broken up over two years, as the Council had previously discussed. Mayor Probst stated that if the reconstruction work was not ordered at this time, the City will not be able to include the project in this year's construction season. He stated that if the City wished to continue consideration of this neighborhood it must move forward with changes being made to the project. He felt that if the City makes the decision to proceed with the reconstruction of this neighborhood, the process should be slowed down. Ifthe Council was not comfortable with moving forward with this neighborhood, the project should be set aside and another project should be found. He agreed that the residents should be provided with better notification. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10, 2000 24 . With the amount of work that has gone into this project already, Councilmember Rem stated that it would not make sense to simply throw it out She felt that the City should continue with the current framework and take into consideration the issues ofthc ncighborhood. Mayor Probst expressed concern that if the project was delayed for one year and the same impasse was reached, this would cost the City two years oftime that could have been used to respond to other issues within the City. 1ffelt that if the City chose to continue with this project and slowed down the process, the residents would understand that the project will take place and he hoped that they would be able accept this. Councilmember Aplikowski stated that she was not comfortable with the idea of changing Engineering firms or bring another agency in to review the project. She indicated that the City has been very conservative about the use of consultants. She felt that if the level of trust improved and the neighborhood was willing to discuss the proposal, she would be willing to make a motion that the City postpone the project for one year. However, ifthe project is delayed and the City is met with the same attitude of mistrust, she felt that the project should be dropped. She stated that the level of mistrust must be overcome before she would be willing to vote in favor of moving forward with the project. . Councilmember Rem noted that the residents had expressed a desire to work together with the City on this project. Councilmcmber Grant agreed and felt that the residents simply wanted to be part of the process. He felt that the issues presented by the residents were valid and he could see come changes that he would like to propose for the project He stated that he would prefer to not be in the position of removing the project from the table and felt that the City should provide the aJIected residents with better notification. He stated that the City Council needed to establish a level oftrust with the residents and he encouraged the City Council to work through the issues and continue with the project. Councilmember Larson stated that it was difficult to determine how the residents really felt about this project Some residents were completely opposed to any reconstruction project, while others provided specific reasons as to why they were opposed, such as not wanting storm water retention ponds, curbs and gutters, or the widening ofthe streets. He indicated that if the only concern was for the level of assessments, and the City eliminated all other aspects of the project and only reconstructed the streets, the assessments would still be approximately $45 per foot. He indicated that the residents gave a number of reasons for not moving forward with the project, however, it was not clear to him that the underlying opposition was to the assessments. If the City Council finds that there were reasons to continue with this project, Councilmember Larson suggested that the City Engineer be asked to provide the cost differences for narrower streets. Councilmember Larson stated that since Ingerson Avenue is a collector street, he felt that it should be widened. However, he would be comfortable with the other streets not being widened. He stated that the City Engineer could also consider the possibility of lining the streets with rain gardens. However, the reconstruction of the streets themselves was still the principal cost. . Councilmember Larson stated that he would like some additional time to think about this proposal and would prefer to discuss it further at the next City Council meeting. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 25 Councilmember Aplikowski asked if State Aid funds would still be available ifIngerson Avenue was not widened. Mr. Brown stated that the requirements for State Aid funds were for a minimum width of 28 feet with no on street parking allowed, Councilmember Aplikowski noted that the primary reason the residents objected to the widening ofIngerson Avenue was because they were concerned that this would increase the speed of traffic, It was her belief that the widening of the road would not make a difference in how much people speed. She stated that people are driving faster because they are in a hurry, She suggested that the City Engineer consider the widening ofIngerson Avenue and Hamline Avenue only, Mr, Brown stated that if Ingerson Avenue and Hamline Avenue were the only roads that are widened, the project would realize an overall savings of approximately $80,000, Mayor Probst noted that the assessment rate has historically been based on a 32 foot road, Mayor Probst suggested that the City Council not make a final decision on this project this evening and that the discussions be carried over to the January 31, 2000 Council meeting, Mr. Lynch noted that the City Council would be reviewing a Planning Case for Bethel College at the January 31, 2000 Council meeting, which could involve a great deal of discussion, Mayor Probst agreed that there may be a number of residents at the next Council meeting to discuss the Bethel College proposal. He felt that the City Council needed to take some time to think about the Ingerson neighborhood reconstruction project, however, he did not want to delay the decision making indefinitely, Councilmember Larson stated that, although the Bethel College proposal discussions may be lengthy, he believed that tllere would still be enough time to discuss the Ingerson neighborhood project. MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to postpone action on the Ingerson neighborhood reconstruction project until the January 31, 2000 City Council meeting, Councilmember Grant asked if the January 31, 2000 City Council meeting would begin at the regular time, Mayor Probst suggested that the meeting be scheduled to begin at 7:30 p.m. If the City staff finds that there was enough on the agenda to justify an earlier start time, a mailing can be made to announce this, The motion carried unanimously (5-0), Councilmember Larson asked if there was the leeway of another week for the City Council to make a decision on the Bethel College project. Mr. Lynch stated that he did not believe that the Council would have an additional week to make this decision, . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 10,2000 26 ADJOURN MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:43 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). NOTICE OF MEETINGS The next regular City Council meeting will be held Monday, January 31, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. at the Arden Hills Council Chambers.