Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 04-19-1976 .,.\ I .,. .. - " , . . . . . MtNUTES OF SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Vi llage of Arden Hi lis Monday, Apri I 19, 1976 Mounds View High School Theater Call to Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Special Meeting held at the Mounds View ~lgh School Theater was cal led to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Crepeau. Roll Call Pres.nt - Mayor Henry J. Crepeau, Jr., Councilmen Charles Crichton, William Feyereisen, James Wingert and Robert Woodburn. Absent - None. Also Present - Engineer Donald Christoffersen, Bond Consultant Peter Popovich and Clerk Administrator Charlotte,McNiesh. PUBLIC HEARING - IMPROVEMENT P-SS-W-ST-75-1 Mayor Crepeau opened the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m. (Minutes of Public Hearing attached to Clerk's offici~1 copy of Minutes). Crichton moved, seconded by feyereisen, that the hearing be closed. Motion carried unanimously. After a short recess, Mayor Crepeau callec! the meeting back to order at 10:15 p.m., noting that Council can order, abandon or defer decision on the improvements. In the discussion, the following questions were raised: t. Can MSA funds be used for construction and then benefitted pro- perty be assessed, thus treeing MSA funds for non-MSA roads? Popovich advised that's his understanding; has found nothing contrary on it; Attorney General has ruled you can assess on MSA roads. Hamline Avenue improvement 2. How does the Hamline Avenue Assessment rate of $22 per front foot, recommended by consultants, compare with cost of other residential streets in Arden HI lis? Popovich recal led that about four road improvements were assessed at 70% of cost, constructed about 15 years ago, and front foot costs were considerably less. Christoffersen said Nursery Hi II, oui most recent improvement, was 100% assessed; approached S20/f~ont foot. It did include concrete curb and gutter, but no storm sewers, is a 7-ton road and was constructed last year; so these costs are very close. 3. ~~~. a hard surface bicycle path be p~t on Hamline Avenue Alternate No.4 (24 ft improved rural road)? Christoffersen did not feel this was feasible due to grades, ditches, swampy areas. 4 . How long would asse~smants run? Popovich suggested that assessments not go longer than improve- ments last, e.g. if Alternate No.5 (overlay) were ordered and has an expected life of 5-10 years, he would recommend assessing over 5 year period. Christoffersen stated that Hamline Avenue has an average of 4-6 inches of bituminous surface (some areas 8-10 inches) with no gravel base; it's hard to predict how long ,1\lternate No.5 will last. The Counei I noted that property owners had expressed a strong fueling to retain the rural character of Arden Hi lis, prefering not to have o wide urban road with curbs and gutters cn Hamline Avenue; many, however, feel a need for some type of wa1~way or bikeway. -1- . ,-C\ . . , ,., " Minutes of Special Council Meeting Page two /1pr,' / .... 19, 1976 Feyerelsen moved, seconded by Crichton, that the Engineer be authorIz- ed to prepare specifications to fill in dips, place a 24 foot wide two inch overlay on Haml ine Avenue and provide for a four-foot wide class 5 or equivalent shoulder on the west side from south of Floral Drive to Highway 96. in the discussion of the motion, it was noted that it did not commit the Counci I to order the improvement. . Motion carried <Crepeau, Crichton, Feyereisen, Wingert voting in favor; Woodburn voting in opposition). County Road F Improvement The Counci I concurred that County Road F was in very poor condition due to construction, heavy traffic and cuts in the roadway for uti lities etc., and felt an urban road was needed. . However, concern was expressed re providing utility stubs for the large amount of undeveloped property abutting County Road F, storm drainage and ponding required, effect of Shoreview drainage etc. The majority of the Counci I agreed that more details Qn util1~Y stubs a~d th~ storm drainage system were needed. Popovich noted that if, within the next six months, Council determines to do something on County Road F, improvementcanbe ordered. Crichton moved, seconded by Wingert that meeting be adjourned at II :07 p.m. ~ AiffidiJfiJ~--, Charlotte McNlesh Clerk Administrator . . . .- e . . . - .' Extract of Minutes of Meeting of City Council City of Arden Hills Ramsey County, Minnesota April 19, 1976 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota was held in the Mounds View High. School theater on Monday, April 19, 1976, at 7;30 o'clock p. m. '!'he following members were present; Mayor Crepeau and Councilmen Wingert, Feyereisen, Crichton and woodburn: and the following were absent; None. Also present were Mrs. Charlotte MCNiesh, City Clerk Administrator: Don Christoffersen of Banister, Short, Elliot and Hendrickson, consulting engineers: and Peter S. Popovich of Peterson & popovich, city bond consultants. '!'he Mayor described the general nature and estimated cost of the proposed improvement and the area proposed to be assessed therefor. The Clerk Administrator presented an affidavit showing publica- tion of Notice of Hearing on proposed Improvement P-SS-W-ST-75-l in accordance with the resolution adopted March 15, 1976, which affidavit was examined and found to be satisfactory and was directed to be filed by the Clerk Administrator. The Clerk Administrator also exhibited a Certificate of Mailing Notice of Hearing to all affected property owners, which certificate was examined and found ~., .' . . . .-. to be satisfactory and was directed to be filed by the Clerk Administrator. The city consulting engineer and fiscal consultant each respectively discussed the proposed improvement. them were as follows: MR. MICHAEL SHEEHY, 4455 Arden View Court: Hasn't had any problems with sanitary sewer or water service. Asked why this improvement was being proposed to give him better service. Mr. Christoffersen replied that the utilities are being installed to facilitate the construction of a road. It involves the extension of sewer and water services away from the roadway so if the road is constructed it won't be necessary to tear it up again to construct underground utilities. Mr. Sheehy suggested that Hamline Avenue would never be a throughway because of the location of the arms plant,and that he doesn't want a throughway. Felt that the maintenance on a four lane road would be as much as maintenance on the road with just an overlay. Thought it would be cheaper to overlay the road every five years than put in the four lane road. MR. ARTHUR ERICKSON, 1298 Nursery Hill Lane: Hamline Avenue already has six to 10 inches of overlay and he thought it was wrong to tear that up and start over again. Sees no reason for a storm sewer in the area. Said he didn't understand the difference between the overlay and the $250,000 project. (Alternate 4 - 24 foot road.) Mr. Christoffersen replied that. in some places the present road has an overlay of only four inches, and there is practically no base under the bituminous paving. The road that's proposed would have a good sub-section far exceeding what's in now. MR. ARTHUR LINDBERG, 4435 Arden View court: Lives in the pemtom Village. Asked how the assessments would be determined for those who live in the townhouses. Mr. Popovich replied that probably the Pemtom frontage on Hamline Avenue would be assessed, which would then be divided among the units. DR. ROBERT A.LEVIT, 4444 Arden View Court: Asked three questions. (1) Asked what the completion times were for the 2 . . . . - .... .' various alternatives. (2) The engineers have assumed an in- creasing flow of traffic on Hamline and that's the rationale for the increase in road size. What if the residents say they would like to discourage traffic flow and by 1999 it's only half of what the engineers predict. What alternative would be most suited to that amount of traffic. (3) What is the lifetime expectancy of the proposal for the overlay. Mr. , Christoffersen replied that the 44 foot, 36 foot, or 32 foot streets would require construction through 1977. The 24 foot street would probably also require construction, into next year, and the only thing that could be completed this year would be the overlay. In answer to question 3, Mr. Christoffersen said the overlay might last ten years, it might last 20 years, but there would be settlement in the street in the next two years. In answer to question 2, Mr. Christoffersen said he believes that people who use Hamline Avenue now will continue to use it a.nd the traffic on Hamline will continue to grow as the growth in the area proceeds and as the traffic flows come from the north. Dr. Levit then asked what width road would be recom- mended for various traffic flows. Mr. Christoffersen replied that the width of the road doesn't control the traffic - it only makes it safer. The width of the road would also depend on whether the residents want parking on one side, or both sides, or not at all. MR. KEITH KOCH, 1410 Indian oaks Trail: Asked the engi- neer why it was necessary to put storm sewers on Hamline Avenue in one of the alternatives. Mr. Christoffersen replied,. "Storm sewers in an urban street are necessary - an urban street meaning one with curb and gutter. At each intersection you have drainage and crowns meeting and it's carried there by the curb and gutter. There's no way unless you build valleys in your intersections - there's no way to get through. You pick it up and carry it through the intersections. Another criteria is as you are picking up water, it collects, and as it comes down the hill you gradually increase the water and if you do not pick it up it could theoretically cover the road at the lower points." Mr. Koch pointed out that Indian Oaks Trail is not crowned at Hamline and he doesn't see the necessity of gutters. There's no water problem at that point. Mr. Koch further said he doesn't understand the need for parking on Harnline. Also said he would be opposed to increasing the speed limit on Hamline Avenue if the road is widened. Further indicated that he doesn't see the need for sidewalks on Harnline Avenue. MR. EDWARD COMPTON, 1287 Nursery Hill Lane: Said he doesn't think the traffic flow now or in the future on Hamline Avenue will warrant a wider street. MR. RICHARD PEDERSON, 1224 Amble Road: If the 44 foot road improvement were constructed, how would the city assess those people who live off of the road. Asked how his taxes would go up if the maximum alternatives were constructed on county Road F and on Harnline. Mr. Popovich replied that his total taxes would go up one half of one percent. 3 . . . . ~ .' MR. GEORGE REILING, 661 Heinel Drive, Roseville: Opposed to any improvement on County Road F mainly because his land is not developed. He would not know where the utilities should <be put in and the street doesn't need to be improved at this time before it's developed. His taxes on County Road F are now ~30,OOO a year and he feels he deserves at least to have the street repaired without paying further taxes. Said he thinks a maintenance job is all that's required. MR. WILLIAM OBERREIT, 4465 Arden View Court: Asked if the state aid funds would be deducted from the assessment figures that had been mentioned or if ,they already had been deducted. Mr. Popovich replied that they had already been deducted. Mr. Oberreit asked. how much of the difference between the total cost and the proposed assessments would be picked up by state aid funds. Mr. Popovich said the total cost per foot of Alternate 1 would be about ~43 and the .assessment is pro.. posed at ~22 so part of that difference would be picked up by state aid funds. Mayor Crepeau asked Mr. Christoffersen what state funds are available for Hamline Avenue. Mr. Christoffersen indicated that the city has available approximately ~215,000 but that is designated for all state aid roads in the city and not necessarily for Hamline Avenue alone. MRS. ATHALIE ROSSOW, 4365 Arden view Court: In favor of the improvement. Asked if the 32 foot width road would allow any room for a bicycle lane. Mr. Christoffersen replied that a bicycle lane could not be built on the street portion, but probably in the boulevard area. MR. DAN GROUT, 1348 Eide Circle: Has a corner lot at Hamline and Eide and his understanding is that the people who own property on Hamline will be the ones who bear the brunt of the cost of the improvement. He uses Hamline for approximately 300 feet from his house to Highway 694 and calculated that his proposed assessment would be about ~4,OOO. He said this doesn't seem fair since the people in the townhouses who use more of the road would only be paying about ~150. Also feels that if all of the improvements go through he won't be able to do anything that he can't do now. Said he would like to see the sidewalks installed. MR. WILLIAM PEDERSEN, 4473 Arden View Court: The surface of Hamline Avenue should be improved because it's an unsafe street. When the townhouse project is complete there may be 5000 cars a day on Hamline and that's a great number of cars on a 24 foot wide street that has swales, bumps, poor ditches, poor shoulders. Further mentioned that the street is extremely difficult to plow in the winter because of the swales and he foresees a serious accident. Said he couldn't speak for the need for storm sewers and sanitary sewers because no one knows what the projected building. plans are for the area. MR. GREG MCNEELY, 1341 Arden View Drive: Thinks Hamline Avenue is an unsafe street: a four-lane road is not necessary: gutters are not necessary: parking on Hamline is not necessary. 4 . . . . .- ._; The road should be widened and there should be a safe space for people who want to bicycle: doesn't like the bumps in the street, but doesn't want to destroy what is essentially the rural nature of the area. MR. ULYSSES HOLLEY, 4235 North Hamline: Doesn't feel that Hamline is an unsafe street. Thinks the street should just be resurfaced and adequately maintained. The same is true.of County Road F. Thought they should give the resurfacing a chance for 5 or 10 years, but beyond that he would be opposed to the improvement. MR. MARK STEPHENS, representing cardiac pacemakers, 4800 North Hamline: In favor of minimal improvements. Asked why none of the state aid money is allocated to the County Road F improvement: would people on Fernwood be assessed for the County Road F improvement since County Road F is their only access: what compensation would be suggested for owners 0:1; the low lying property which would be designated as ponding areas. Mr. Christoffersen replied that state aid funds are used primarily to take care of the extremely high cost between a commercial street and a residential street. If a commercial street has to pass through a residential area, the state aid funds could be used to reduce the cost to the resident to the residential rate. AS to the matter of ponding, Mr. Popovich said. that if it's a matter of taking some rights, the company would be contacted by the city attorney for flowage rights and they would be paid compensation for it. Mr. Christoffersen said his recollection was that Fern- wood was 100% assessed or 100% paid for. Councilman Wingert added that it was built and dedicated to the city. JOANE SAMUALSON, 4361 Arden view court: Replying to a statement made earlier, said that the people in the townhouses don't live on Hamline and therefore their assessments should be less than for residents who do live on Hamline. MR. THOMAS GOSERUD, 4350 North Hamline: Resurfacing the street would suffice. DoeSn't believe they need curb or gutters or storm sewer. Said he's already been assessed for water and sewer and "I don't feel that I should be assessed somewhere around another $5000, including interest, for the street which somebody else living across the street from me or down the street from me a little bit is going to use just as much." MR. JOHN SWENSON, 1355 Eide Circle: Asked how much that part of the improvement would cost for the extension of the utilities for the north end of Hamline at Highway 96, and if storm sewers are put in, what happens to the water level in the marshy areas along Hamline Avenue. Mr. popovich replied that the watermain services total about $5,300: sanitary sewer $8,396, and the forcemain about $5,000, and storm sewer about $79,000 and part of this is included in the cost of the street. Mr. Christoffersen said that basically the storm sewer is just a different method of conveying the water from one point to the other rather than going in the ditches and he didn't believe it would affect the pond more than a quarter of an inch in the ele- vation depth. 5 ., " ... . . . . - MR. TIMOTHY JORISSEN, 4466 Arden view Court: Thinks Hamline Avenue is very unsafe and favors either the 44 foot, 36 foot, .or 32 foot street. Enjoys the rural quality of the city and has some fears that a 44 foot street may attract more traffic than they want. Doesn't think sidewalks are neces.sary. MR. TIMOTHY RUTKOSKE, representing the Midwest Relay Company, 1296 west county Road F: Improvement should be made on County Road F but they do not see the practicability of sewers going in because the land is undeveloped and they don't know what development will exist as far as being commercial or residential. Does not favor installation of curb and gutter or sidewalks. Believes only the road should be improved. MR. JEROME WEAVER, 1330 Amble Road: Agrees that the road is unsafe and does need resurfacing. The speed limit is danger- ous - whether it's 35 or 45, the cars go 50 or 60 miles an hour. said increasing the width of the road will increase the traffic. Favors the overlay for the road and lowering of the speed limit. REVEREND GARY BENSON, 1366 Indian oaks Trail: In favor of keeping the ditches the way they are on Hamline. In favor of fixing the street and leaving the ditches, but not the curb and gutter. MR. ROBERT GEIST, 2689 lOth Lane N.W., Coon Rapids: Planning to build a home on Indian oaks Trail. Thinks the road should be resurfaced and some street lights put in. MR. RICHARD LARSON, 1840 Palace Avenue: County Road F does not require a four lane road. Feels that the development of industry as it takes place would call for what additions are needed in terms of sewer and water and other utilities. These things should be done before you put in a four lane road so it doesn't have to be torn up. Thinks the road should just be re- surfaced. Didn't understand why there should be a four lane on Hamline, running up to the arsenal. MR. MANUEL CABEZAS, Registered CPI for Mark Stephens (Cardiac): County Road F is not a main thoroughfare and a mini- mum improvement should be more than adequate. Said they have 2600 feet of frontage and it would impose a severe hardship if they had to bear that cost alone.. MR. ROBERT GERALD, 1377 Arden View Drive: Said a 24 foot roadway is not wide enough, particularly to allow bicycles, and suggested that the minimum be 28 feet so there would be a two foot shoulder on each side. MR. ED JACKSON, 1310 NUrsery Hill Lane: . Favors only resur- facing Hamline Avenue and leaving the ditches where they are. MRS. JUSTINE-O'CONNOR, 4126 Gale Circle: Said some of the previous comments indicated that people wanted Hamline widened so there would be room for bicycles. Believes that 6 " . . . . .:...... , bicycles should never be in the street if it's possible to get them anywhere else. suggested that the bicycle lane be on the boulevard and the street kept rural. MR. MICHAEL COROLCHUK, 1330 NUrsery Hill Lane: Moved to Arden Hills six months ago because of its rural atmosphere. Doesn't think Hamline is too rough - it's all right the way it is. All that's needed is a little maintenance. MR. GERALP SLADEK, 4420 North Hamline: Doesn't want to pay for someone to be able to ride a bicycle on Hamline Avenue. MR.. DONALD SALMELA, 4123 Norma Circle: Appreciates the quality of Hamline Avenue as it is. Said it's a safe street if driven at 20 miles an hour, but unsafe for those driving too fast., The street could be resurfaced, otherwise leave it alone. MR. EDWARD COMPTON, 1287 Nursery Hill Lane: 'Leave the street the way it is and put in a proper speed limit. FROM THE AUDIE.NCE: Suggested that if more bumps were put in the road it might slow down the traffic. MR. JOHN SWENSON, 1355 Eide Circle: Thinks Hamline should only be resurfaced. Said he couldn't stand the increase in taxes and assessments. The only reason he's heard to widen Hamline is for bicycles. Asked if they couldn't ride in the park areas. FROM THE AUDIENCE: It appears a 44 foot street is high priced biking. MR. TIMOTHY JORISSEN, 4466 Arden View Court: said that typically people who attend public feasibility hearings are opposed to the improvement. Asked the Council how they would gauge the opinions of those who do not attend - or if they just forfeit their rights. Mayor Crepeau replied that they don't really forfe~t their rights, but this is one way for the Council to know how the people feel. Mr. Jorissen further asked if a petition by people who did not attend the hearing would carry any weight. Mayor crepeau replied that the Council would be interested in a definite statement - not merely a "for" or "against" petition. MR. EDWARD COMPTON, 1287 NUrsery Hill Lane: Suggested that if a petition is circulated to the people in the Pemtom area, it should contain all five proposals - not just one. MR. JEROME wEAVER, 1330 Amble Road: Said he didn't know why the speed limit had been increased on Hamline and also commented that there had been very few accidents on Hamline. Asked if anyone knew how many accidents there have been on . Hamline over' the years. Mayor Crepeau replied that the county engineering department probably keeps a record of accidents and that speed limits are controlled by the state highway depart- ment or the county engineer's office. 7 >. . . . - MR. THOMAS GOSERUD, 4350 North Hamline: Thought the speed limit had been lowered from 45 to 40 for a few weeks a couple of summers ago. Mayor Crepeau indicated there had been a mis- take in the signs. '. MR. ROBERT GEIST, 2689 lOth Lane N.W., Coon Rapids: Planning to build a home on Indian Oaks Trail. Suggested that the dangerous spot is when cars come from Snelling on to Hamline. Suggested .there should be a stop sign there. MR. EDWARD COMPTON, 1287 Nursery Hill Lane: Asked when the Council would finalize the proposition. The Mayor replied that the Council has six months in which to act on the improve- ment. MR. JOHN SWENSON, 1355 Eide Circle: Asked if anyone had looked at these proposals from a safety standpoint, or if there was a traffic engineer who might render an opinion. The prime concerns are bicycle riders, school buses, and children. Said he's not able to determine whether they'd get as much benefit from the fourth or fifth proposal as they would from the first. The Mayor replied that it just depends on how much people want a bicycle path or sidewalks. That would determine how wide the road should be. MR~ MANUEL CABEZAS (Cardiac): Asked what the assessment period would be for commercial property. Mr. Popovich indicated that all assessments would be carried for the same length of time. MRS. AmALIE ROSSOW, 4365 Arden view Court: Said most of the people seem to favor the resurfacing alternate. Asked if a sidewalk could be put in with that plan. Mr. Christoffersen explained the process of putting in sidewalks. MRS. SUSAN TAYLOR, 4394 Arden view Court: Leaving every- one with the impression that the Pemtom people prefer alternates 1, 2 or 3 is wrong.. Many of them, including Mrs. Taylor, would prefer to merely have the road upgraded. MR. TIMOTHY JORISSEN, 4466 Arden View Court: Said he was sorry he had left that impression. MR. ~ ALDRIDGE, 1257 Amble Road: In favor of plan 4 or 5 - the 24 foot road or the overlay. However, he felt that even with resurfacing, the dips on Hamline would be back in a couple of years. Asked what would be required in connection with the resurfacing. Mr. Christoff"ersen explained the process and said he could not guarantee a level riding course for any length of time. Sometimes overlays are successful and sometimes they are not. Mr. Aldridge suggested that there should be closer inspection while construction is in progress. MR. ARTHUR ERICKSON, 1297 NUrsery Hill Lane: said he thinks there's agreement that they need an overlay on Hamline 8 . . . . . . - . Avenue. So far as bicycle trails and sidewalks, he thought the Council could use the money more productively by putting side- walks in the school areas where the children have to walk to school and are not bussed. MR. DANIEL GROUT, 1348 Eide Circle: Asked if there was any way that the cost of whatever project is undertaken could be borne by all of the people who will benefit and not just those people who own property bordering the road. Mr. Popovich replied that usually only those people who abut the road are assessed. Councilman Woodburn commented that the streets that. go into Hamline Avenue have been assessed and the property owners have paid for those streets. MR. THOMAS GOSERUD, 4350 North Hamline: Asked if part of the cost of Hamline AVenue would be picked up by general taxes. Mr. Popovich replied that part of the cost of the improvement would be paid by general taxesithat he recommends part assess- ment and part general taxes when a city has a diversified tax base. MR. JOHN SWENSON, 1355 Eide Circle: Asked what alternatives there might be for people who have corner lots. Mr. Popovich replied that for purposes of this hearing the estimated assess- ments were based on front footage. The matter would De further discussed at an assessment hearing. However, there were alternatives. The Council could decide to put more on general taxes: it could forget about corner lots and just raise the front foot assessments a little higher. MR. MICHAEL COROLCHUK, 1330 NUrsery Hill Lane: Commented that if you lived in st. paul a corner lot would be assessed for the front of the house. Mr. Popovich replied that the city has assessed on corner lot frontage and a portion of the side. Mayor Crepeau commented that on a sewer or water assessment if you have 150 feet in front and 150 feet on the side you can connect in either place, but so far as a road is concerned he didn't see any advantage that a corner lot has. Councilman chrichton indicated that the Council would determine at a later time what assessment method is to be used. COUNCILMAN CHRICHTON moved that the hearing be closed. The motion was seconded by Councilman Feyereisen. All in favor: none opposed. 9