Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 11-30-1981 . . Minutes of Regular Council Meeting Village of Arden Hills Monday, November 30, 1981 - 7:30 p.m. Village Hall Call to Order Pursuan t to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Woodburn called the meeting to order st 7:30 p.m. Roll Call Present - Mayor Robert Woodburn, Councilmen Diane McAllister, Maurice Johnson, Janet Hollenhorst ~ Absen t - Councilmsn James Wingert Also Present - Village Engineer Donald Christoffersen, Treasurer Donald Lamb, Bond Counsel Peter Popovich, Deputy Clerk Dorothy Zehm Approval of Minutes Hollenhorst moved, seconded by McAllister, that the Minutes of the November 23rd Council Meeting be approved as amended. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Business From 'lhe Floor None PUBLIC HEARINGS: Ramsey County LexinRton Avenue Pr01ect, Crey Fox Road to County Road F snd Improvement No. P-81-4 (Concrete Curb and Gut te r) (See attached Minutes of Hearing) Hollenhorst moved, seconded by Johnson, that Council authorize eltecution of the Arden Hi lls Ramsey County Agreement. Motion carried (4-0). Johnson moved, seconded by Hollenhorst, that Council adOpt Reso- !9tion 81~ERING THE CON~RUCTION OF IMPROVEMENT NO. P-81-4. //~ a . -?~.~-cr Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST 8~~3 (Arden Oaks) (See attached Minutes of Hearing) (Johnson left the meeting prior to Council action). McAllister moved, seconded by Hollenhorst, that Council adopt Resolution No. 81-8S, Ordering Preparation of Plans and Specifications, Improve- ment No. SS-W-P-ST 81-3. Motion carried unanimously (3-0) . Proposed Vacation of Roads in Shady Oaks Addition (Arden Oaks) Mayor Woodburn opened the Public Hearing at 8:55 p.m. and Deputy Clerk Zehm verified that the Notice of Hearing was puhlished in the New Brighton Bulletin and mailed to affected property owners on November 19, 1981. A drawing of Sh ady Oaks Addi tion, as presently platted, was shown by Kurt Laughinghouse (developer of Arden Oaks), with Arden Oaks superimposed over the original plat. Laughinghouse explained that the reads wi thin the eltisting plat (Shady Oaks Addition) are pro- .. posed to be vacated in order to provide for the new plat (Arden Oaks) . Donna Hatch, 3632 Pascal Ave. No. , asked if the vacation affects the portion of Pascal Ave. not included in Arden Oaks. It was elt- plained that it would not; only change proposed is tha t a turn- around area is proposed at the north end of Pascal, within Arden Oaka. Atter determining that there were no further comments or questions, the Public Hearing was closed at 9:0S P .Il. It waa Council's understanding that Attorney Lynden will prepare the resolution, vacating the roads in Shady Oaks Addition within the Arden Oaks plat, for Council adoption at a later meeting; that the developer of Arden Oaka (Kurt Laughinghouse) will contact Attorney Lynden relative to preparation of a Development Agreement. -1- -----.- . . . Minutes of Regular Council Meeting Nov. ;\0, 1981 Approval of 1982 Liquor Licenses Council approve Hollenhorst moved, seconded by McAllister that issuance of the following 1982 Liquor Licenses, subject to appli- cation and bond corrections recommended by Attorney Lynden: 11 Hotel Managers and Restaurant, Ine. 1201 West County Road E d/b/a McGuire's Inn On-Sale, On-Sale Sunday, Off-Sale 12 Big Ten Suppe r CI ub , Inc. 4703 Highway 10 On-Sale, On-Sale Sunday, Off-Sale 13 GDM d/b/a Lindey's Prime Steak House , 3610 N. Snelling Ave. On-Sale, Off-Sale 14 Flaherty's Arden Bowl, Inc. 1243 W. Coun ty Road E On-Sale, On-Sale Sunday 15 Arden Hi 11s Club 4177 Fernwood On-Sale, On-Sale Sunday 16 Blue Fox, Inc. 3833 N. Lexington Ave. On-Sale, On-Sale Sunday 17 Star Liquors, Inc. 3537 North Lexington Ave. Off-Sale Motion carried unanimously (3-0) . REPORT OF VILLAGE CLERK ADMINISTRATOR CHARLOTTE MC NIESH (abs~nt) 1982 Workmen's Compensation Quotation - Employees Bene f1 t Administration Co. Council was referred to Estimated Annnal Premium for the City of Arden 1\111s, which Mayor Woodburn noted is less than budgeted in 1982 because of the considerably improved Experience Modification Factor. McAllister moved, seconded by Hollenhorst, that Council approve the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust Self-Insured Worker's Compensation Quotation. Motion carried unanimously (3-0) . State Aid Apportionment - Firemen's Relief Association Hollenhorst moved, seconded by McAllister, that Council approve payment of $57,383.62 to Lake Johanna Volunteer Firemen's Benefit Association, Inc. Motion csrried unanimously (3-0) . COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS . InRerson Psrk McAllister reported considerable tree and sh rub damage in Ingerson Park caused by the recent snow/ice storm. Strobe Lights - Motorola Tower Hollenhorst reported that Dan Vaughan said he would sppreciate receiving any complaints relative to the Motorola Tower in written form, for his submittal to FAA and the manufacturer of the tower 11gh tB . . -2- . . Minutes of Regular Council Meetins Nov. 30, 1981 Ad1ourn...ent Hollenhorst ...oved, seconded by McAllister, that the meeting adjourn at 9:46 p..... Motion carried unanimously (3-0) . C<<Aha;t;~Wk~z g~~I~------.J Charlotte McNiesh Robert L. Woodburn Clerk Administrator Mayor ~ Notice of Council MeetinR The next Regular Council meeting will be held on Monday, De cemb e r 14, 1981 at 7: 30 p. m. at the Village Hall. . . -3- Extract of Minutes of Meeting . of City Council City of Arden Hills Ramsey County, Minnesota November 30, 1981 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, was held in the City Hall in said City on Monday, November 30, 1981, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. The following members were present: Mayor woodburn and Councilmen Johnson, McAllister and Hollenhorst; and the fol- lowing was absent: Councilman Wingert. Also present were Donald Lamb, City Treasurer; Donald Christoffersen of Short-Elliott-Hendrickson, Inc. , City Engi- . neersi Dorothy Zehm, Deputy Clerk; and Peter s. Popovich of Peterson, Popovich, Knu tson & Flynn, City Bond Consultant. MAYOR WOODBURN: The next hearing is for Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-81-3. It will be explained in detail in a moment. Mrs. Zehm, do you have the affidavit of publication? MRS. DOROTHY ZEHM: It was published in the New Brighton Bulletin on November 19 .and 26, 1981. We also have the Cer- tificate of Mailing on file. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN : This improvement was initiated pri- marily by the Arden Oaks Addition and it includes sanitary sewer, watemain, and construction of streets and some storm drainage. There are some problems, in this rather isolated piece of property, whereby watermain has to be extended . through the property, as well as sanitary sewer and a street. I'll start with the streets. To begin .with, it will be typical seven ton design streets, concrete curb and gutter, 34 feet wide. It's proposed to improve Wesley Avenue from County Road E to Arden Oaks Drive. This is an existing right-of-way, somewhat of a thoroughfare - some type of street - there's a driveway at this end of it. This would be all constructed by the developer, as far as grading and such in this area and in . the Arden Oaks development. It includes the construction of Arden Oaks Drive in a circular manner, back out to Old Highway 10_ Proposed sanitary sewers to this point on Wesley to ----------- -- serve not only the development, but two potential lots in this area and perhaps some property in this area, although this is low . and it's questionable whether or not it can be developed. Sanitary sewers would run along the center of the streets, roughly speaking, in a westerly direction back to Old Highway 10, under Old Highway 10 to the west side. Also, sanitary sewer is proposed to be constructed on the west side of 10. There's a piece of property in here that is not currently being served by sanitary sewer. This sanitary sewer would drain in this direction and at this point it is proposed to install a sanitary sewer pumping station to pump the sewage in from a low area, back down southerly to the existing sanitary sewer along County Road E. It is proposed to construct water- main .on Wesley Avenue beginning at County Road E, along the streets in the development, around the development, again back out to Old Highway 10, and up on the left side of Old Highway 10 and crossing southerly across County Road E and making the connection to the existing watermain. Thus, we're making the large loop that's required. Additional internal drainage would include storm sewer construction, drainage out to the north towards the Soo Line Railroad to the proposed storm water detention basin, which would be constructed by the developer. Also, another storm sewer beginning at the low area just on the west side of Wesley Avenue, north of County Road E, which would commence northerly at Arden Oaks Drive, around to the east end of Arden Oaks Drive . and then draining northeasterly to another storm water deten- tion basin which ultimately drains to the Soo Line Railroad, which ultimately drains to the west and then crosses northerly under Old Highway 10 to Bethel College and Valentine Lake. Points of interest - in addition to the heavy dark line that you'll notice here is the outline of the proposed Arden Oaks Development. There are other parcels of property that may utilize the facilities being constructed. I neglected to point out here that sewer and water are being constructed north to this area, primarily to serve this particular lot and house, and a potential lot to the east of that existing house. This is not part of the development. It could potentially be served by sewer and water with what is being proposed, as well as this property in this location and, although it's not drawn on this map, there are two lots developed in this area that can be served by this proposed improvement. I believe that . completes it, your Honor. MR. POPOVICH: Mayor and members of the Council, the total estimated cost of this project is $648,935.00. Of that, the Arden Oaks Addition portion is estimated at $466,035.00. The balance of the improvement would be on Wesley Avenue and portions of Pascal and Old Highway 10. $207,710.00 would be the cost of the sanitary sewer, $141,960.00 for watermain, . $252,820.00 for street, and $46,445.0.0 for storm drainage. Depending on where the lots are, there are different amounts that will be assessed. Assuming it's 100% assessed, if a lot 2 gets sanitary sewer, that assessment cost will be $4,830.00; . watermain will be $3,301.00; street will be $6,320.00; and storm sewer will be $1,161. 00; so if you got all of that, the total cost would be approximately $15,612.00 per lot. As I remember from the feasibility report, there are about 43 lots that receive that type of improvement. It would be our recom- mendation that for those - assuming the assessment - that we ought to not assess over longer than a 15 year period because of present market conditions. But for that portion that lies within the addition, because it's totally a developer matter, the Council may wish to consider a development agreement where those total assessments are paid in a three to five year period. I don't know if the developer is here, but that is one item that you ought to consider because it does affect the amount of financing you do and how fast (inaudible) in the actual development itself. It's possible to have different assessment formulas within the same improvement because of the difference between where there are existing properties as compared to those that are being requested by the development agreement. Assuming it is assessed, as the greater portion of the project will be, and we're assuming 100% assessment here unless there are some allowances that the Council makes at the assessment hearing, that will be spread over a period of time determined by the development agreement, or not to . exceed 15 years at the maximum interest rate, which would be 1% more than the bond issue or not more than 12%, as permitted by the Local Improvement Code. Assuming the project is done in 1982, we will hold our assessment hearing next fall and collections should commence in 1983. This is one of the projects that would be included in the proposed bond issue if it was approved and you decided to go ahead. That issue is scheduled for sale in late January or early February. MAYOR WOODBURN: M:t:. Christiffersen, 43 lots were men- tioned as possible assessable lots, or involved lots. Which ones are in the development? Do you have those figures with you? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The lots within the development are outlined by a heavy dark line and there are five or six po- tential lots outside, depending on how the property is divided. When I say five or six, there are two potential . lots here, two or three along the east side of Old Highway 10, and that depends strictly on the development and. the way the land is divided. There is a long, deep lot which exists as one lot right now and there's potential for another redivision of this land, creating a lot fronting on Arden Oaks Drive. Currently that is counted as one. That number could be changed though. . MAYOR WOODBURN: Mrs. Zehm, are -there any written com- ments on the development? 3 ------------ MRS. ZEHM: No, I have not received any. . MAYOR WOODBURN: I will open the public hearing. The developer is here if you would to make any comments. MR. CURT LAUGHINGHOUSE, Derrick Land Company: We did petition for the improvements within Arden Oaks and we do hope they will be improved and put upon the program for next summer and be financed as a public improvement, as we have requested. One thing I was surprised at, and it's not a great deal, but I was surprised at the size of the section and I guess I need to ask Mr. Christoffersen - the size of the road section - is that 34 feet back to back or inside the faces? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN : Face to face. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: So it's even greater, 35 feet perhaps, back to back. When I say back to back, I mean back of curb to back of curb. MR. CHRISTOFFERS EN: Back of curb - it would be closer to 35, 35 1/2. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: That's just a bigger section than what I'm accustomed to, but if that's the City standard, that's just fine. Mr. Popovich did refer to the terms of assessment. That is, whether its 15 years or three or five or otherwise. . We would prefer longer assessments - it makes it much more reasonable for - of course, this will be settled next fall. As you can imagine, these lots will not necessarily sellout immediately, and the better terms that can be available, the easier it will be on the ultimate consumer of the lots. Other- wise, I'd be glad to answer any questions. MR. POPOVICH: On that point, he indicated he could wait with the development agreement until the assessment hearing. From our point of view, 'assuming we sell bondS in a month or two, if you're going to have a development agreement, we should know that now, because in the bond prospectus that goes out we could then indicate that there would be some $466,000.00 of $648,000.00 that would be paid over a three to five year period because of the terms of the development agreement. That affects whether we go with long term financing or short term financing because obviously, if the people who are going . to bid on the bonds know that so much of it is going to be paid within a certain period of time - that's going to affect your interest rates. So we can't wait until the. assessment hearing next fall. That's something that the Council and the attorney and the developer should get together on before we advertise for bond bids. I just wanted to say that so Curt would know where I come from right now, not next year. . MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: I didn't realize that. We'd be happy to work that out. 4 MAYOR WOODBURN: (Inaudible) in January. . MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: We can work on it right away. MAYOR WOODBURN: It should be one of our items on the agenda hopefully in January. MR. JOHN ECKERT, 3620 North Pascal: As it's been ex- plained here, there are going to be no improvements to North Pascal. Is that correct? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: There is a potential - not along Pascal itself - a potential turn-around at the north end of it. An emergency vehicle turn-around. I didn't discuss that. That's part of the proposed improvement - part of the cost as in the proposed improvement is to provide what we call a hammerhead-type turn-around - just a "T" - for emergency vehicles to turn around. Relocation of a hydrant. That's the extent of the construction. MAYOR WOODBURN: Any more questions or comments? MR. MAX STOUTENBURG, 1435 West County Road E: In regard to the lot size - the lot size is going to be quite a bit larger than what the existing lot sizes are in the other area. For instance, my lot there in the corner is 75 by 168, I believe, and I don't know what the others are, but you get up . into that other area there and the lots look like they're twice the size of what the normal lot size is. Is this standard procedure for the Village - to put that size lots in there? And again, what kind of housing is going to go in there when they build the houses? Are these lots just going to go up for sale and the owner has the choice of picking the type of housing that goes in there or are you actually going to build the houses and sell them as lots and houses? Are you going to sell the lots or lots and houses? What kind of housing can we expect in there? Are they going to be in the $100,000 category? If you build a $100,000 house right behind my house, my property values are going to drop. That's what I'm con- cerned about. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: Our firm does not build this kind of single family home. We have developed - just to give you some kind of idea - we have developed, in the last three years - . I'll go through it real quickly - in Lake Elmo, 150 single family lots; in Mendota Heights, 40 some; Apple Valley, 70 some ; Minnetonka, well over 100; Wayzata, 20; all single family. In Minnetonka we have also developed a couple of duplex lots - seven in fact. In Coon Rapids we have 114 lots of singles and quads. The only construction our company has ever done has been on the duplex lots in Minnetonka. Generally, our plan - first of all, we sell them to make the most money . (inaudible) . Generally, our plan has been to sell these to individual purchasers. In the past, that's what we've done. We have also usually - and at this point I don't want to say we're going to - but we usually put covenants on the property 5 so that an architectural control committee within our company controls the architecture, or the design, of the house. As to . the dollars question, I doubt very much that anything on there could be built for less than $100,000, or probably $140,000 or $150,000 or $160,000. We sincerely hope that it will be in that range, or more, because the lots are going to have to be priced at $25,000 and up. One doesn't build $100,000 homes - that's probably the minimum that you can build on a $25,000 lot. I don't anticipate devaluating the properties around it at all. I don't mean to sound elitist - I think we're going to do a good job of controlling the architecture. However, we will not - I strongly doubt that we'll be building the homes. That is not our custom. MAYOR WOODBURN: Another question I can perhaps answer here - this is a residential zone and this type of zone, 95 feet is the minimum lot that would be allowed - 14,000, plus or minus, square feet. MR. STOUTENBURG, Isn't that quite a bit more from what our standard lots are there? MAYOR WOODBURN: Perhaps more than what yours is, but not in an R-l zone -it's 85 feet, I believe, in R-2; 95 feet, I believe, in R-l. Your lots were designed a while before the zoning was in, I'm sure. I would like to just vaguely comment on something else you said - I think the general experience is, . when new, expensive houses are built in a neighborhood like this, that it helps the housing value. MR. STOUTENBURG, It helps their housing value. MAYOR WOODBURN: No, yours. I think that is what is generally found. I'm not a realtor - somebody else might want to comment on that too. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE, I did remember another question the gentleman asked - the lots on the east side are extra large. The reason is that the land along the east side is quite low. It's sort of an extension of that pond that's up on the north- east corner. That is the reason that they are larger lots. It's not possible to move the road to the east and put more lots in. We have put the lots in, more or less to the stand- ards of the City - minimum standards of the City. Again, what . the Mayor said, 95 foot frontage and so many square feet. MR. STOUTENBURG, When you go through a project like this, do you level off all the trees or are you going to leave most of the oak trees that are in that area back there and let the homeowner that buys the lot determine how many trees he wants to cut down? . MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE, Same answer. A modern developer is not like the developer in the 1950's. We all learn, I guess. Not that I was a developer in the 1950's, but we don't clear 6 ----- the land and put the streets in straight - not at all. We've made an effort here to put the roads where the terrain tells . us, so there's minimum grading. We also, you'll notice, between the two cul-de-sacs - that's where the woods are - we put a minimum of streets in there. An older plan that was proposed for this land - the former owners put across - had a full loop road there and we cul-de-saced for the very reason you mention - preserve trees. We intend to preserve trees just as much as we can. They're valuable to us as sales tools. We wouldn't cut down a tree - in fact, very frequently I go through and work with the people who are marking the trees and if there's one on the line - leave it. Then we go back and when we try to pave the darn thing and grade for sewer, we have to take .another tree. We keep it to a minimum when we can. MAYOR WOODBURN: Mr. Christoffersen, in the feasibility report, how much grading is anticipated in the road? Do you have any idea of any grading that might go on? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The grading is being covered by the developer - they'll do the grading. I believe that he should address that question about how much.. Under general improve- ments with a developer, the way the City has operated in the past, the developer performs a site grading to his specifica- tions and then the City builds the street to match the grade that he grades. That seems to work out much better. As Mr. Laughinghouse indicated, he is ready to conduct his grading . operation to preserve as many trees as possible. Obviously, I think that in any grading operation, as far as trees and as far as the street is concerned, you can expect at least the right- of-way to be cleared of trees. MR. WALTER DUNNETT, 1541 Oak Avenue: When you say lot - would that be the 95 foot expanse? MR. POPOVICH: An average lot. MR. WALTER DUNNETT: Our property is running along the left side - the west side of old Snelling there - we have that land and the pond in there and the railroad tracks. So it's probably roughly 300 feet of land, I guess, plus the pond. So I'm obviously interested in what we're talking about there. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: He could develop three lots. There . would be three unit assessments across that property. If you develop two, they'd obviously be MR. DUNNETT: bigger, but would that be two unit assessments or would it still be for 95 or 100 feet or whatever it is? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I suppose that would be two. I guess it's a question of how many on the frontage and the . character. By the time you get into this area here, it's getting rather low. 7 . MR. DUNNETT: Is it physically possible to make three lots out of that? .' MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: It's physically possible. I believe it would be recommended to assess for three lots. If it isn't physically possible to make three lots, the other recommenda- tion would be for two. MR. DUNNETT: That would be sewer and water, not street? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Right. MR. DUNNETT: That sewer line is coming under the road .there on an angle. That would, I assume, come in on the south side of the pond. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: This is the pond, roughly. It would be in the location - somewhere in this vicinity - you would probably have to get some type of an easement to place a sewage pumping station in that location. I believe the right- of-way is very restricted there because they've widened the road so much. So it's really the only logical place that we have to locate a sewage pumping station. This site is loaded with utilities right now. MRS. DONNA HATCH, 3632 North Pascal: You're talking about putting in all of these sewers and.stuff - how will that affect . us? We have our sewer, our water, our street. Will we be assessed for any of this? I know there has to be some kind of sewer thing (inaudible) . What's going to happen? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Can you show me where that would be? MRS. HATCH: I live in the last house on the right. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: It appears that you have sewer and water facilities. MRS. HATCH: We have a deadend watermain. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That's correct. That would continue as such. There would be no proposal to carry that through and make a loop out of that system. The only question that the Council may wish to consider is the assessment for the . improvement of the turn-around on the end. I don't know how that would be spread up and down the property line. That's the only potential. I guess that cost was just added into the overall road construction cost. We did not assume, in our report, any unit assessment being on Pascal Avenue. There again, that's something the Council would have to consider at the time of the assessment hearing. . MR. POPOVICH: Let's point that .out. They are included in the improvement hearing, but they weren't computed a cost on the big lot size. The north end of Pascal Avenue does have 8 . some street costs and a watermain cost in there that could be spread and the total amount of it is small, but it is something 4It that could be, depending on the assessment hearing, spread between "E" and up Pascal. The full amount of it, the engi- neer can't tell us at this time because it is a very nominal portion of the overall $648,000. If you look at your feasi- bility report, I think on page 6, there's a cost of $1500.00, or something like that in there - page 6 of your summary of costs - there's a cost in there for the north end of Pascal Avenue. I just didn't want the people to think there was going to be no cost at all. Obviously, you wouldn't be assessed again for sewer and water if they already have it, but if there has been some sort of improvement and they get a benefit, that would come up at the assessment hearing. MAYOR WOODBURN: Mr. Popovich likes to leave all of his avenues open. The assessment hearing, of course, will occur at some later date, after the project. MAN FROM AUDIENCE: Maybe we should include repainting the deadend street signs so we wouldn't have so much traffic. WOMAN FROM AUDIENCE: Yes. Do something about those dead- end street signs. MAYOR WOODBURN: Yes, I know. I live on the end of one myself and I think it invites people to come down to see what . is there. MAN FROM AUDIENCE: To see what a deadend looks like. T' ~ STOUTENBURG, JR., 1435 West County Road E: What's considered a low lying area? I do a lot of cross country skiing back there and I've noticed on lots 5 and 6 that there's a pond in there that has about five feet of water in it at one time, but this past summer it was all dried up. I noticed you don't have that shown as a low lying area. The developer said, I think, that the development on - I can't read it very well - 11 and 12 there and 1 and 2 over there - they don't know if they're going to develop there. I was assuming that 5 and 6 were the same as 11 and 12 and 1 and 2. MAYOR WOODBURN: This 5 and 6 - there are two of them up there. The northern 5 and 6? ~ MR. STOUTENBURG: Yes. (Inaudible). There's a low lying area that has had five feet of water in there at one time. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: He is correct. There is a small, intermittent pond - it might be more like 6 and 7 - but it's in that neighborhood. That would be filled. I do have the preliminary plans which, maybe after the meeting; we can talk . with the neighbors and show them all the details that you've been over in past meetings. 9 MAYOR WOODBURN: I think they deserve to see it. Maybe you would want to show them - we could put it up here. . MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: I hope everyone can see this. The lighter lines are the topography that is in place and the darker lines are grading that we're going to accomplish. As an example, from here - Snelling - there would be a cut along the road and, in partial answer to the tree question, we will leave this slope as steep as we can, leaving as many trees as we can. The ultimate home buyer/builder will set out the trees and driveway as necessary. When you come around here, this gets into a fill. This is the pond that you mentioned. There will be some fill around here. Then here, this is where there is .a sharp slope here - we intend to fill back this far and these become (inaudible) all backing up on the pond. The actual pond is right in here. When I talked about this being low, it's only low to where the road is. So in order to - if we wanted to actually improve this or put a cul-de-sac down here or something like that - it would take an immense amount of grading, andwe're just not going to do that. This is going to remain larger lots. (Inaudible conversation between those looking at the map.) A little bit of grading here and a little bit of grading to accomplish this road. Now, the tree line is right here, so the edge of the roadway goes right up the tree line here - I hope everyone can see that - and, of course, we have to cut through the trees right here. We cut out this section of the road just for that reason, plus we . like cul-de-sac lots - deadend lots. MAYOR WOODBURN: I recognize this isn't really part of the storm sewer, etc. , but we'll still answer any questions. Any further questions? MR. ADOLPH MILLER, 3609 North Pascal: Why couldn't we put up a deadend street there and save that extra assessment? MAYOR WOODBURN: neadend street on Wesley? MR. MILLER: On Pascal. MAYOR WOODBURN: Well, it's a deadend without the hammer- head. We haven't said there would be an assessment for that. There could be, perhaps. There are several reasons that this has been considered to be put in. One of them is fire protec- . tion. They don't like things where they can't back up and get out of the way - get trapped, and things like this. The second reason for it is snow storage. Those are. two that I can think of right off hand. MR. MAX STOUTENBURG, 1435 West County Road E: Is there a limited time, once they develop this land, before all the housing and stuff has to be built in there? Or can he develop . it and ten years later maybe the final housing will be built in there? 10 , MAYOR WOODBURN: That's right. . MR. STOUTENBURG: So just because they're going through and putting this - first they want to sell the lots and if they sell a lot, someday somebody can build on it, but I've seen some lots where five people will go and buy a lot and just keep it for a lot - they never do build on it. MAYOR WOODBURN: There's not too much we can do about that, We can't force somebody into something. MR. STOUTENBURG: When that project originally started, I was thinking a developer was going to go in there and actually build the houses and the whole works and just sell the houses and the lots all together. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: May I speak to that, Mr. Mayor? In the first place, all the lots that are in place are part of the plat that was platted in the 1930's. That plat goes right across our property. In other words, if you stay after this hearing, we'll get some more maps up here - this road, although it's only paved to here, is platted and the City owns the road all the way straight up to here, it runs around here, and it's platted and comes right back down. There are lots - here's one of them - and they run right straight up there and they stack right up here and so forth~ Those lots that are under there have been there since the 1930's. Nobody can force a . developer to build a house. But, a lot of money has gone into this already and more money is going to go into it and assess- ments will have to be paid, so if pressured - there will be pressure for it to be developed. MR. S TOUTENB URG: I guess my concern is - how long am I going to have to listen to hammers pounding back there? AmI going to have to listen to it for ten years? MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: I sure wouldn't want to promise. You're right - someone may buy a lot for the investment. In Mendota Heights, a party bought two lots - built a house on one and within a year they sold the other lot for a profit. MAYOR WOODBURN: Pretend they're woodpeckers. MR. STOUTENBURG: If the price of fuel keeps going up, . I'll buy the lot just for the wood. MR. POPOVICH: I hope we don't run into this too much, because some of us can remember in St. Paul - in the Highland Park area - they put in streets, curbs, gutters and everything and it all went tax delinquent. That whole Highland Park area. The City ended up selling lots at tax forfeited sale. When you go back in history, you can have some situations that are . bad examples of what could happen. 11 ----.- MAYOR WOODBURN: Over-extension. I guess we can't tell somebody how to run their business. . MRS. RHODA BEHR, 1401 West County Road E: We live on the corner of County Road E and Wesley. This new road is going right down the side of our house. We don't need that road. We have a road in front of our house. We won't go down that road. will we be assessed for that road since it's going right down the side of our lot? MAYOR WOODBURN: On the lot that that house stands on, there are no improvements going in that improve your property. In other words, you have water, you have sewer. MRS. BEHR: I'm talking about the road that's going down the side of our house. We won't be assessed for the road, will we? MAYOR WOODBURN: I can I t answer that because thisisn I.t the assessment hearing, but the general rule, as Mr. Popovich keeps telling us, is that if property is improved by an improve- ment, you can assess it. If it's not improved, you can't. Normally, (inaudible) roads and things like this are not con- sidered an improvement to.the property, at least not like a road that serves them. MRS. BEHR: I was once told that once you pay your assess- . ments, you're not taxed again for them. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: Unless they have new ones and they redo the road. MAYOR WOODBURN: You were never assessed for County Road E. MRS. BEHR: No. MAYOR WOODBURN: I haven't answered your question and I don't think I can at this point. Are there any other ques- tions? If there are no more questions about this, we will close the public hearing and go on to any questions that the Council may have. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: How far are we supposed to go on . this tonight? On the agenda here it says "ordering prepara- tion of plans and specifications". I'm concerned about the developer's agreement. MR. POPOVICH: Obviously, if the Council orders the improvement tonight, you would order it and then plans and specs would be prepared for bid letting. Between now and the time we sell bonds would be for the formulation of the develop- . ment agreement that you negotiate with the developer. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: We don't need that first? 12 ----.-.,- __n_____ MR. POPOVICH: You don't need it first. You're leverage is - if he doesn't agree with you, you don't order the plans . and specs to be advertised. Obviously, if the development agreement was done now - assuming the improvement went ahead - you'd know what it was. I don't know what else you want to put in a development agreement because there are a number of things that do go into it that your counsel recommends. But if we ordered the improvement, then he started on plans and specs to call for bids, we wouldn't have to approve the plans and call for the bids _ because that's additional cost - until that development agreement is in place. MAYOR WOODBURN: In this case, ordering the improvement is similar to ordering the plans and specifications. In this type of situation, a possible assessment situation, we have different terminOlogy. MR. POPOVICH: Mayor, may I ask - do we have a petition on this? The reason I ask, I notice Maurice just left and normally you need four votes and then three if it's 35% peti- tioned. MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: We did petition MR. POPOVICH: I want the record to show - Mr. Laughing- house, who controls more than 35% of the affected property - your company - petitioned for it. . MR. LAUGHINGHOUSE: Yes sir. MAYOR WOODBURN: Is it 35%? MR. POPOVICH: 35% of the affected property within the improvement. Obviously, there's more land than just his, but it's obvious, when you look at his addition compared to the others, that's more than 35%. That permits you to go ahead with three votes out of five instead of four out of five. MAYOR WOODBURN: Any questions from the Council? I have another question or two of Mr. Popovich. You indicated that assessments can proceed for various years. Can they be done in various manners on different parcels - lots, for instance, within an improvement, and linear footage without? . MR. POPOVICH: Yes. So long as you arrive at what you feel is the increased market value due to the benefits. We come back to that old rule again. Formulas are only a way to get at the benefit. You can use any kind of a formula or approach, so long as the property is benefitted accordingly. MAYOR WOODBURN: I don't think I have any more questions. Mr. Popovich and Mr. Christoffersen have nothing more to add, . I gather, at this point. We have at this point our options - we can continue this for another meeting, we can order the impro vemen t, or we can say no to the whole project. 13 COUNCILMAN McALLISTER then introduced the. following resolu- 4It. tion and moved its adoption: Resolution No. 81-85 RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-W-P-ST-81-3 UNDER AND PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 429 BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, that in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1961, Chapter 429, as amended, the Council held a public hearing on the proposed construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-8l-3, consisting of the ,installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, bituminous paving, concrete curb and gutter, necessary drainage facilities and necessary appurtenances in the general area bounded by S.T.H. 51 on the east, County Road E on the south, the west line of Sec. 27 on the west, and the Soo Line Railroad right of way on the north, as described in the Notice of Hearing at a cost presently estimated at $648,665.00, and substantially in accordance with the prelimi- nary report as to the feasibility thereof which is now on file in the office of the Clerk Administrator; and having considered the views of all interested persons and being fully advised in the premises, the Council does hereby determine and order that said improvement shall be constructed and financed, and special ~ assessments shall be levied therefor, pursuant to said Chapter 429, and that the area proposed to be assessed therefor shall include the property as described in the Notice of Hearing. The City Public Works Director is directed to prepare and submit to the Council the final plans and specifications. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilman Hollenhorst, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: All; and the following voted against the same: None; whereupon said resolution was. declared duly passed and adopted. . ~ 14 " , Extract of Minutes of Meeting of City Council . City of Arden Hills Ramsey County, Minnesota November 30, 1981 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, was held in the City Hall in said City on Monday, November 30, 1981, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. The following members were present: Mayor Woodburn and Councilmen Johnson, McAllister and Hollenhorst: and the fol- lowing was absent: Councilman Wingert. Also present were Donald Lamb, City Treasurer: Donald Christoffersen of Short-Elliott-Hendrickson, Inc., City Engi- neers; Dorothy Zehm, Deputy Clerk; and Peter S. Popovich of - . Peterson, Popovich, Knutson & Flynn, City Bond Consultant. MAYOR WOODBURN: We'll move now to the 7:30 hearing - the public hearing on the Ramsey County Lexington Avenue project. I believe we have the honorable engineer from Ramsey County with us tonight. Would you like to explain this? MR. WAYNE LEONARD, Ramsey County Public Works Department, Coordinating Engineer: We have put together a proposal for the improvement of Lexington Avenue,-essentially from Grey Fox, or Island Lake Road, north across 694, up through "F" to the south entrance of Control Data's main entrance, the south entrance. The proposal basically is for a 68 foot wide roadway, face to face, concrete cur~ and gutter, which is exactly the same road- way that is immediately south of Island Lake Road, across the railroad tracks and down to "E". That is, one that provides . for two lanes north bound and south bound, with a center left turn lane without any medians in it. That is t~e proposal - to extend that section on up to the Control Data driveway. The project would involve some minor storm sewer appur- tenances to the present storm sewer under construction, filling some ditches with boulevards, planting some trees on the boule- vards. It would also involve a detached bituminous path on . the east side, connecting with the path now that ends at the south of the YMCA, and continuing on to the north end of the project. ... . The project is essentially anticipated to be financed with County, State and highway gas tax receipts and'funds appor- . tioned to Ramsey County. We estimate the cost of the project to be $1,213,760.60. That's our engineer's estimate. We'll take bids and prices will change. Of the total cost of the project, the County anticipates that $18,556.85 will come out of County road bridge funds for the construction of the detached bituminous path. We have asked the City of Shoreview for $23,619.75, on the basis of our estimate, for essentially some $19,000 worth of curb and gutter - participation for the con- crete curb and gutter - and $4200.00 worth of utility improve- ments which they have asked to have included in the plans. The plans have been presented to Shoreview, they have reviewed them, I believe they're looking into some financial aspects as to how they're going to fund their share of this project. We anticipate they may approve it at their next Council meeting next week. The Arden Hills participation in the project that we're asking for is estimated at $18,896.06, based on 75% of the cost of the curb and gutter adjacent to the Arden Hills properties. We have also asked that the City participate in the acquisition of any right-of-ways that may be necessary or easements required as part of the construction project. I believe, if I could just quickly review it, I think what we're proposing here is to continue the section south of Grey . Fox, down around the railroad tracks and "Ell there, on across 694 and up through "F", and up as far as the Control Data entrance. A companion to that is a project ,that will provide new traffic signals at "F" that are traffic actuated. That's a separate project, to be constructed simultaneously with this. There is essentially, to my knowledge, no real controversial issues with the project. I think the only place that there is some concern is that the existing bridge presently is 52 feet wide and it makes provision for two lanes across 694 - two lanes in each direction. It would be preferable to have two lanes in each direction, plus a left turn lane for those two ramps there. I think the biggest problem is the fact that we're pro- posing this eight foot bituminous path and it comes to the bridge without what we consider adequate provision to get pedestrians across.. With that concern in mind, we have been working with the highway department to provide a separate ten foot wide pedestrian facility on the east side of the widened . bridge, along with widening the bridge enough to provide for a left turn lane. This project has not developed to the point where we have scheduled the construction. It cannot be scheduled, I don't believe, to coordinate with this construction, but we are working towards what we see as a bottleneck in here - that is, the bridge over 694 - and the numerous left turns that are . made, either onto the ramp to go west or onto the ramp to 694 to go east. If the project, meets with the City of Shoreview's 2 ---- ~ , and the City of Arden Hills' approval and agreements are exe- cuted, we anticipate that we will be able to get the Minnesota . Department of Transportion and County Board approval in time to start construction first thing next spring. Our time schedule right now would be to submit to the Department of Transportation in the middle of December and the County Board in February, take bids in March and award a contract in April and anticipate construction in early spring. We would esti- mate that by Labor Day the project would be sufficiently com- pleted that bituminous surface would be restored for driving and that by Thanksgiving, the sod, trees and everything else would be planted and the road fully operational a year from today. If there are any questions, your Honor, I'd be happy to answer them. MAYOR WOODBURN: I'm sure there will be. You said the width - I don't know (inaudible) on the number of lanes. MR. WAYNE LEONARD: It's 68 feet. That's provided for two lanes going north, two lanes going south, and that 14 feet down the middle for left turns. The only medians would be the ones right at the 694 ramps. On either end of the ramps there is a piece of median - this brown thing here. Other than that, there are no medians proposed except - well, there is a little tiny piece right at - controlling left turns right at "F" and another one right at the end of the Control Data driveway. If you're familiar with the short piece that you . have in there now, it's a continuation of the exact same (inaudible) . MAYOR WOODBURN: That's your initial explanation, at least, of the project. Thank you. We'll probably have a few more questions coming up. First I'd like to ask the Clerk Administrator - has this project, as described, been published? DEPUTY CLERK ZEHM: Yes, it has, in the New Brighton Bulletin on November 19 and 26, 1981. We also have the Certificate of Mailing on file. MR. POPOVICH: Mayor and Members of the Council, the pro- cedural aspects relating to publication and mailing have been properly handled. So far as my part is concerned, out of the total cost that the" Ramsey County people have indicated it would be, the Arden Hills' portion amounts to $18,900 roughly, . to which we've added $5,000 as a total cost, and it was pub- lished at a total cost of $23,900.00. The extra $5,000 was added as a judgmental cost that the engineer, the clerk's office and ourselves added to it because that's how much Ramsey County wants to get, and there are some additional costs that the City has to bear. While they expect you to pay 75% of the cost of the curb and gutter in Arden Hills, they also expect the easement cost as well_ Those costs, at this time, we do . not know what they are. The engineer's report indicates that they should be nominal on the affected property owners because 3 --- - . of the benefit that would be received. Assuming then a total cost of $23,900, there are 3600 feet of assessable abutting . property and if you were to assess that cost 100%, it would run to $6.65 for the assessable footage on the property within Arden Hills. Obviously, the purpose of the hearing tonight is to determine the feasibility if we're going to assess and if we're going to assess 100%. If the council decides not to go the assessment route and pay for it out of general funds or some other thing, then obviously we wouldn't include it in any financing. If it's going to go the assessment route, then obviously we want a maximum situation presented at the public hearing tonight. As you know, we're planning a bond issue sometime in February, assuming all of these projects that are presently under consideration finally materialize, so that we know what the total bond issue would be. If we have to finance it, that's the amount that we would finance over a 15 year period, assessable at the maximum assessment rate per- mitted by law, which would be 1% more than what we receive on the bonds, but not exceeding 12%. Obviously, an assessment hearing would be held probably next fall, after the project is in or substantially completed. So there would be no assessments commencing until the year 1983. At this particular point, assuming it's an assessment approach, that's the pur- pose of the hearing tonight. If the Council decides to waive all assessments and pick it up with some other funds, that's a judgment decision you can make'at a later date. MAYOR WOODBURN: We can decide to go through the assess- ~ ment procedure and later on still decide not to assess it at all, or in part, or up to $6.65. MR. POPOVICH: That's right. MAYOR WOODBURN: Mrs. Zehm, are there any written ques- tions? DEPUTY CLERK ZEHM: I do not have any. MAYOR WOODBURN: I will open the meeting now to public comments. They may be either for or against. MR. MAX STOUTENBURG, 1435 West County Road E: I would like to know if and when they do plan on widening that bridge. You're saying right now that the bridge isn't actually part of that proposed plan at the present. So it will go through just tt like the County Road E plan did, where they left a two lane bridge and a four lane on either side. When do ~hey plan on putting the bridge in if they don't plan on doing it now? MR. WAYNE LEONARD: The present bridge, the way the thing is being utilized, it's basically a two lane bridge - one in each direction. As part of this project, we would widen the roadway off the end of the bridge so that we would ~ have four lanes - that is, two lanes in each direction. The remaining problem, as I see it - that probably will be adequate 4 . to carry the traffic, if it wasn't for the people blocking up the center lanes for left turns to ramps, and if it wasn't for . the lack of an adequate facility for the path across the bridge. We are working with the Highway Department - we're going to have a four lane bridge, which is going to be better. I think it's going to operate a lot more efficiently than the system that we have out there right now. As far as the project with the Department of Transportation - it's a cooperative project to widen the bridge, to accommodate the left turn people, and the bike facility. We're working on that. They have given us some indication that they want to see it as part of this project, that is, incorporate it with it. We said fine, we think it's a great project, but the timing isn't the best, and that we're going to have to proceed with this project. If the other one could catch up - fine. If it can't, it could certainly come the following year. I cannot really give you an answer on the timing on that. It's part of the interstate system funding in there, and where federal funds are available, the whole thing gets a little bit hard to tie down until you get some answers here (inaudible) . MR. STOUTENBURG: What do they plan on doing with the traffic flow when they're doing the work? MR. WAYNE LEONARD: I think we will attempt to carry traffic as much as possible through the construction. I believe that we will ask for stage construction - that is, we . will do this work down here on the south end and then this work on the north end and not tear up the whole thing at once. The contractor will be asked to provide for some type of traffic handling in the area. We do think that it may be advisable to consider shutting down part of the interchange for a period of time - a couple of weeks at some point, or three weeks - to really get in there and do the work. In the long run, that may be the least cumbersome to the people. The proposal is basically to have the contractor handle it, with limitations as to what he can do. MR. STOUTENBURG: The only reason I'm concerned is that I work for Control Data and I have to travel that way every day. My main concern up there is the traffic jam we have now with Land O'Lakes up there and all the other (inaudible) . ESpecially County Road F and Lexington - that's really a mess. . MR. LEONARD: That's a great part of what has precipitated this project - the need there because of all the people in the area. You can say it anyway you want, but we're. going to have to suffer through one construction season to get an improvement that's going to work for a good many years to come. MAYOR WOODBURN: Any further comments or questions? We will close the public hearing then at 7:55 p.m. and turn it . back to the Council. Does the Council have any questions? Mr. Christoffersen? 5 . . COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Let's assume that eventually we could do something with that bridge over 694. Is it your intention . then to widen it sufficiently enough to provide five lanes, plus pedestrian? MR. LEONARD: That's correct. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: So if you ever do something with it, it will ultimately match the rest of the profile on Lexington? MR. LEONARD: That's the proposal at this point, yes. In fact, it will be 72 feet instead of 68 (inaudible). MAYOR WOODBURN: County Road E is apparently not going to have its bridge changed. We've asked for it before, and it's not (inaudible) enough to have a priority, not even a low priority. Anything further fro~ the Council? COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: I've asked you before - eventually, where the plans (inaudible) north on Lexington - you're taking it up to the driveway at Control Data. Then what? MR. LEONARD: Our original proposal here, a few years back, was to improve it all the way to Trunk Highway 96. First of all, this improvement, the width of this improvement, was anticipated to narrow down as soon as we got on top of the hill there by the next entrance to Control Data, .to a 52 foot road- . way, more nearly similar to Lexington Avenue to the south. Because the gas tax receipts have held rather constant on a cents-per-gallon income and construction costs have gone up considerably, we have cut this project back this far. We do not presently have scheduled when we will be able to fund the next piece on up to 96. But it's still in our program, it's something we would like to do, but the money just isn't there. (Inaudible) maybe this will bring in some additional funds. Construction costs have gone up faster than the receipts, and we just cut the project down. Someday maybe. This isn't for- gotten. MAYOR WOODBURN: What are your traffic projections on Lexington? Do you think they'll change with this? If so, where would they subtract from, if anyplace? MR. LEONARD: We don't anticipate that this project will be subtracting any numbers of traffic, with the exception . probably of Victoria, where people may be getting off Victoria and going around and corning through "F" from that direction. There may be some influence seen (inaudible). We anticipate increased traffic here, but what's happening is Control Data and Deluxe Check and Land O'Lakes - as the development in the area that is being served here at 694 and off of "E" - that is building up the traffic increase. We don't anticipate a . gr7at deal of tra~fic corning off of other. roads that are be1ng used (1naud1ble). We see the need 1S there now. The road is overloaded. There .is every indication that additional 6 . . pressure will be put on the road as additional things are de- veloped in the area. Hopefully it will help Victoria a little . bit for a while. As soon as that development spreads to the east, Victoria will have its own problems. MAYOR WOODBURN: What's happened on Lexington south of there, with the traffic flow? MR. LEONARD: We haven't projected any significant change from before we reconstructed this. We haven't noticed any differences. People have become accustomed to the geometry and we haven't noticed any real complaints lately. In fact, it seems like when you drive it that there are fewer cars out there. MAYOR WOODBURN: I don't drive it since it was improved. MR. LEONARD: I think it's just a sensation - the lanes are farther apart and you have the feeling that there aren't as many cars, but if you count them they are still there. MAYOR WOODBURN: There's a sensation of quite a few more stoplights on there too. MR. LEONARD: We added two more. MAYOR WOODBURN: Any further questions? We have then an . authorization from the County to execute an agreement between the County and Arden Hills, authorizing the improvement and the fact that the County will pay - that we will pay 75% of the curbs. I think you probably have that agreement, or have seen it. We have our choice of several things. We can defer it - there's no immediate push on it. However, since we have considered it tonight, we might want to go ahead on it. We can go ahead on it if we do want to, with the attorney's approval. I don't think we have the formal approval on that yet. Or we can just go ahead and authorize the agreement. I have a copy of it here, and it's essentially just to go ahead and do the road and we'll pay for 75% of the curb and gutter. I don't think there's anything more than that. Plus the very small areas of easement that might be required. COUNCILMAN HOLLENHORST: I move that we authorize and execute the Arden Hills-Ramsey County agreement, subject to the attorney's approval. Councilman Johnson seconded the It motion, which carried unanimously. After further discussion, Councilman Johnson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: . 7 ~ Resolution No. 81- 84 . RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENT NO. P-81-4 UNDER AND PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 429 BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, that in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1961, Chapter 429, as amended, the Council held a public hearing on the proposed construction of Improvement No. P-81-4, consisting of the installation of concrete curb and gutter on all that property abutting and west of Lexington Avenue between County Road E and Victoria Street, being done in conjunction with Ramsey County's improvement of Lexington Avenue, as described in the Notice. of Hearing at a cost presently estimated at $23,900.00, and substantially in accor- dance with the preliminary report as to the feasibility there- of which is now on file in the office of the City Clerk Admin- istrator; and having considered the views of all interested persons and being fully advised in the premises, the Council does hereby determine and order that said improvement shall be constructed and financed, and special assessments shall be levied therefor, pursuant to said Chapter 429, and that the area proposed to be assessed therefor shall include the property as described in the Notice of Hearing. The City Consulting Engineer is directed to prepare and submit to the . Council the final plans and specifications. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilman Hollenhorst, and upon roll call vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: All; and the following voted against the same: None; whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. . . 8