Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 02-01-1982 , Minutes of Special Council Meeting Village of Arden Hills Monday, February 1, 1982 - 7: 30 p.m. Village Hall Call to Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Woodburn called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. . Roll Call Present - Mayor Robert Woodburn, Councilmen Janet Hollenhorst, Diane McAllister, Maurice Johnson Abaent - None Also Present - Village Engineer Don~ld Christoffersen, Treasurer Donald Lamb, Clerk Administrator Charlotte McNiesh, Deputy Clerk Dorothy Zehm. Approval of Minutes McAllister moved, seconded by Johnson, that the minutes of the January 11th Council Meeting be approved as amended. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Business from the Floor None Rice Creek Watershed District - Board of Managers In discussion relative to the Council's concerns about the poten- tial flooding of the City's sanitary sewer system, resulting from the construction of various control structures constructed by Rice Creek Watershed District in the Ramsey County Open Space north of Lake Johanna, Weidenbacher said that the most heavily impacted area is between the Soo Line and County Rd. E2; noted that there was a 1.5' freeboard before the structures were in- stalled. Weidenbacher acknowledged Mr. Dimke's verbal statement that RCWD would raiae the affected manholes; noted that the Johanna outlet is still the problem - RCWD had wanted the lake level at a one foot lower elevation. It was noted that Village Engineer Christoffersen and Public Works Supervisor Johansen expressed their concerns relative to the flood- of the lift station and sanitary sewer lines prior to construction of the Lake Johanna outlet. Weidenbachen said the only feasible options are to rsise the 12 manholes and to fill around them, or install watertight manhole covers, cost to raise the 12 manholes and fill around them at a 4 to 1 slope was estimated at about $11,000; cost of 12 water- tight manholes was estimated at $4200. . Christoffersen suggested that the seal-type manhole lid would be preferable; agreed that maintenance of the raised manholes would be difficult, if not impossible. The Board of Managers agreed to install the 12 watertight man- holes in this area. Council concurred that this seems to be a logical solution of the problem; would like input of Johansen and Christoffersen re this solution. Public Hearing: (8:30 p.m.) Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST 81-5, RO.llll lIill_~ Mayor Woodburn opened the Public Hearing at 8:30 p.m. and Clerk Adminietrator McNiesh verified publication of the Notice of Hear- ing in the New Brighton Bulletin on January 21st and 28th, and that notices were mailed to affected property owners on 1-20-82. (See attached Minutes of Public Hearing) . Minutes of Special Council Meeting February 1, 1982 Mayor Woodburn closed the Public Hearing at 10:15p.m. After the public hearing was closed, and discussion by the Council, developer Marcel Eibensteiner requested that Council action on the proposed plat be tabled until the next Council meeting, affording Council and himself time to consider the feasibility report and tonight's discussion. McAllister moved that Council table its action on the Preliminary Plat of Royal Hills until the February 8th Council meeting. Motion was seconded by Hollenhorst and carried unanimously (4-0). REPORT OF VILLAGE ENGINEER DONALD CHRISTOFFERSEN Approval of Ramsey County County Road E 'Median Plans . Christoffersen referred Council to County Road E median plans; re- ported that the only change, since Council's approval of the plans, is the addition of a replacement catch basin at Lindey's corner. Hollenhorst moved, seconded by McAllister, that Council authorize execution of the Ramsey County Median plans for County Road E by the Mayor. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Approval of Traffic Control System - Lexington/694 Ramps Council was referred to plans for the Lexington Ave./694 ramps traffic control system. After discussion, McAllister moved, seconded by Hollenhorst, that Council approve the traffic control system plans (Lexington/694 ramps) and authorize execution thereof by the Mayor. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Status Report on Cable Television - William Baue~ Bauer reported that each municipality in the North Suburban Cable Commission is required to hold a Public Hearing, prior to the joint Public Hearing on March 25th and before the consultant's final report scheduled on March 10th. Hollenhorst moved, seconded by Johnson, that Council schedule the Arden Hills Cable Television Public Hearing on February 22nd at 8:45 p.m. at the Village Hall. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Bauer noted that franchise applicants will probably attend to answer questions; will each make a full presentation at the March 25th joint hearing. Bauer reviewed the Cable Television Calendar: Ap ril 1 Public Hearing on CATV in Arden Hills Arden Hills Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting NSCC Regular Meeting -Review final voting procedure -Discuss joint power administration agreement? Consultant Issues Final Report NSCC Regular Meeting -Major "Show and Tell" Public Hearing -All Councils invited -All applicants will give presentations NSCC Meeting -Vote to select proposed ~ranchisee . Feb ruary 22 February 23 February 25 March 10 March 25 Bauer referred Council to proposed draft of Joint Powers Agree- ment for Council's review; suggested that any changes thereto ahould be made as soon as poasible. REPORT OF VILLAGE TREASURER DONALD LAMB Investments January 20th - $380,000 at Twin City Federal for 120 days, maturing 5-20-82, at 13.55% interest. -2- . Minutes of Special Council Meeting February 1, 1982 , January 28th - $100,000 at Oak Park Heights for 6 months, maturing 7-28-82 at 14.75% interest. Johnson moved, seconded by Hollenhorst, that Council ratify the Treasurer's investments. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). OTHER BUSINESS Public Safety Committee Recommendation - Stop or Yield Sign at Edgewater/Prior Avenues Johnson reported that the Public Safety Committee recommends denial of the request. . McAllister moved, seconded by Johnson, that Council deny the re- quest for a "stop" or "yield" sign at the Edgewater/Prior Avenue intersection at this time based on the Public Safety Committee's recommendation that it is not warranted for traffic volume or safety reasons. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Committee Appointments Upon recommendation of Council members Johnson and McAllister, Mayor Woodburn appointed Don Halva as a member of the Board of Appeals for 1982. Johnson moved, seconded by Hollenhorst, that Council ratify the Mayor'e appointment. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Other potential committee members who have volunteered or been recommended for appointment will be contacted by Mayor Woodburn. Resignation - Finance Committee Council was referred to letter of resignation from the Finance Committee from Frank Hlavka. McAllister moved, seconded by Hollenhorst, that Council accept with regrets Frank Hlavka's resignation. Motion carried unani- mously (4-0). RecyclinK Unlimited Request for Drop-off Facilities Council was referred to McNiesh's memo of 1-29-82. After dis- cussion, in which some concern was expressed relative to appropri- ate zoning, possible "litter" problems, and need for facility, matter wae deferred. Request for Time Extension for Payment of Park Dedication - Janet Estates It was noted that Council previously granted an extension to December 1981 for payment of the Jsnet Estates park dedication, and granted an extension for filing the amended plat of Janet Estates to June 8, 1982. McNiesh explained that the initial request for extension for pay- ment of the park dedication was to June of 1982 (Council granted the extension to December 1981). . After discussion, Johnson moved, seconded by Hollenhorst, that Council require payment of 50% of the balance due of park dedica- tion now, and approve extension of payment of the other 50% to June 8,1982, with interest at 14% annual rate. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). ~blic Works Supervisor Johnansen Requests: (memo of 1-28-82) A. Temporary Employee _ McAllister moved, seconded by Johnson, that Council approve the hiring of Todd Langenbach at $6.50/hr. per Johansen's memo of 1-28-82, effective February 2nd. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). -)- Minutes of Special Council Meeting February I, 1982 B. Temporary Increase in Cop-oensatorv Time earLy-over McAllister moved, seconded by Hollenhorst, that Council approve the compensatory time carry-over of up to 80 hours for the months of February and March; all excess over 40 hours to be used by May 1st, as recommended in Johansen's memo. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Report on Fire Board Meeting Johnson reported that the Board is recommending a 5-year contract with ISO (Insurance Service Office) inspection prior to 1985; recommending a ceiling of 15% - 20% and a minimum of 10%. Johnson asked Council's input as to whether the cities should pay for an earlier inspection, anticipated to cost $3,000 - $5,000, and be subject to the Fire Dept's approval. . Council concurred that the Board try for 15% maximum; queried whetber Fire Dept. approval of inspection agency is required; suggested the Board obtain additional cost information relative to an equivalent inspection. Johnson reported that the Board has requested a more detailed annual report which will cover training, inspection, equipment improvement, percent of increased costs put back into capital improvements in the way of equipment etc. Johnson Marshal Homes. reported that the Fire Chief is waiting for a State Fire report relative to the alarm system at Presbyterian Uniform Fire Code Johnson asked why City bas not adopted the Uniform Fire Code; suggested that Council's reasons be listed for the Public Safety Committee's consideration and recommendations. Fire Lanes Johnson asked about City's role relative to enforcement of "no parking" in fire lanes; noted some areas of concern, some of which are on private property; noted thst he has requested Ramsey County ticketing of violators. McNiesh noted that the City's policy has been to refer fire lane parking situations to Fire Chief Koch for recommendations for signage. ~tsman Club FishiEg Contest Hollenhorst moved, seconded by McAllister that Council approve and authorize execution of the Permit to Conduct Water Exhibitions or Placement of Structures In the Lakes for the Arden Hills Sports- man Club temporary stand on Lake Johanna during the fishing con- teat February 27/28, 1982. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). REPORT OF VILLAGE CLERK ADMINISTRATOR CHARLOTTE MC NIESH 1981 Use - Federal Revenue Sharing Council was referred to McNiesh's memo (1-28-82) requesting ten- ative Council consensus on the use of 1981 Federal Revenue Sharing. . After discussion, Council concurred with the transfer of $34,000. Hollenhorst moved, seconded by McAllister, that a Public Hearing be scheduled at 8:30 p.m. on February 22nd. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Resolution No. 82-10, Apportionment of Assessments, Improvement No. W 77-5 and W 78-2, Briarknoll Plat II. Hollenhorst moved, seconded by McAllister, that Council sdopt Resolution No. 82-10, RESOLUTION RELATING TO APPORTIONMENT OF ASSESSMENTS RELATING TO COMBINED IMPROVEMENT W-77-5 AND W-78-2. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Payroll Hollenhorst moved, seconded by McAllister, as submitted. Motion carried unanimously to approve the Payroll (4-0). -4- . . , . Minutes of Special Council Meeting February 1, 1982 COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS McAllister Hotel/Motel Tax Proposal by Ramsey County McAllister reported that copies of Resolution 81-81, Opposing the Proposed Hotel/Motel Tax have been sent to our legislators; noted that the matter was removed from the current Ramsey County House Delegation Agenda; assumes notification will be forth coming if it is placed on the agenda again. Hollenhorst noted that it is also opposed by RCLLG. Tennis Court Lights Council was referred to memo from Bu'ckley relative to replacement of two light meters for the tennis court lights which will cost $50 to replace. Council concurred with the replacement expenditure if the meters can be installed by the Parks Dept. Finance Committee McAllister asked if Finance Committee input, relative to the five year Capital Improvement Plan, should be requested. In discussion, it was suggested that information from the Planner, Engineer, Parks and Public Works be compiled for the Finance Com- mittee's consideration; suggested that s sub-committee be appointed to discuss the plan with input from the Engineer and Planner. City of Mounds View Proposal Relative to Shared Equipment and/or Personnel McNiesh reported that an informal meeting of clerks and managers will be scheduled relative to equipment and personnel available; a mayors meeting will also probably be scheduled to discuss other ramifications of the proposal. Ho llenhors t Human Rights Commission Hollenhorst reported that the Human Rights Commission is also con- cerned about a burglary prevention program. Council concurred with her suggestion that the Public Safety Committee and Human rights Commission work cooperatively to establish a program for the City. . Communication Tower Strobe Lights Hollenhorst suggested that an alternate lighting system be pursued with Mr. Vaughan. In discussion, it was suggested that clarifi- cation be requested from Attorney Lynden relative to the City's position in the matter. McNiesh was asked to contact Lynden rel- ative to status of the park dedication. Woodburn Roseville School District 623 Chemical Health Program Woodburn reported receipt of a letter from the Community Health Advisory Committee requesting assistance with chemical health pro- grams in District 623. Council referred the request to the Human Rights Commission. Applicants for Council Position Woodburn reported that four persons have expressed their willing- ness to serve on the Council: Dale Hicks, Thomas Mulcahy, Keith Ness and Jeanne Winiecki Council concurred to delay the appointment until February 8th, to give Council the opportunity to talk with the potential candidates. -5- Minutes of Special Council Meeting February 1, 1982 Adjournment Hollenhorst moved, seconded by Johnson, that the meeting adjourn' at 1:25 a.m. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). ~d1l/J}ti~,L Charlotte McNiesh Clerk Administrator &~'1##~\/ Ro ert L. Woodburn Mayor Notice of Meeting The next Council Meeting will be held at 7:30 p.m. at thp Village Hall. on Monday, February 8. 1982 -6- , , . . . ". ..~ ; ,. Extract of Minutes of Meeting of City Council City of Arden Hills Ramsey County, Minnesota .. February 1, 1982 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 City Hall in said City on Monday, February 1, 1982, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. The following members were present: Mayor Woodburn and Councilmen Johnson, McAllister and Hollenhorst; and the fol- lowing were absent: One Vacancy. Also present were Charlotte McNiesh, City Clerk Adrninis- trator; Donald Lamb, City Treasurer; Donald Christoffersen of Short-Elliott-Hendrickson, Inc., City Consulting Engineers; Peter S. Popovich of Peterson, Popovich, Knutson & Flynn, City Bond Consultants; and Dorothy Zehm, Deputy City Clerk. MAYOR WOODBURN: The hearing this evening is for Improve- ment No. SS-W-P-ST-8l-5. MRS. McNIESH: We have the Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of publication for this project on file. . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: This is proposed Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-8l-5, which is primarily concerned with the Royal Hills Subdivision. The general location is Highway lO - the westerly portion - Briarknoll Subdivision on the north and Floral Drive on the south and off the chart is Hamline Avenue. The boundary description follows along the east highway line of Highway lO, the south line of Briarknoll, through the park and down through the park, along the centerline of Floral Drive back to the east line of Highway lO. The improvement consists of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer and street. First of all, I'll discuss the sani- tary sewer. There is an existing sanitary sewer on Briarknoll, being constructed by the developers of Briarknoll, which terminates .at this particular point. It is proposed to con- struct a sanitary sewer from the south end of the cul-de-sac. . '^ , f . By the way, this plat is at the preliminary stages right now and is before the Council for approval. It starts at the south end of the cul-de-sac street and goes northerly to the north boundary line. This particular reach of sanitary sewer has not been constructed at this time. The reason for that not being constructed - at one time the developer of the Royal . Hills plat had a cul-de-sac street coming in this direction on one of their preliminary plats, and had planned for the sani- tarysewer to drain down the cul-de-sac and out in this direc- tion. That was all the information that was available at the time this plat was - at the time the plans and specifications were approved for this plat. Therefore, this sanitary sewer was not constructed. The developer of the Royal~ Hills plat is making arrangements to have this little connecting link constructed this summer. Watermain consists of a watermain at the south end of the cul-de-sac street, running northerly and connecting into existing watermain on the Briarknoll plat. The Briarknoll developers have constructed the watermain to the south line. Watermain also extends easterly along Royal Lane to the park area, down along through the park and back to Floral Drive. The purpose of this particular watermain in this area is to complete a looping system which eliminates long, dead-end watermains, both along Norma Avenue and Floral Drive. Storm sewer is proposed to be extended to the low area in the park to drain the park and drain westerly to the inter- section of Norma Avenue and Royal Lane and then westerly out and down the steep hillside to the ditch along Highway 10 and into a low area which eventually reaches a storm water deten- tion basin to the north of Briarknoll. . There are two alternatives for streets. The basic con- cept for streets, obviously, in the Royal Hill Subdivision, is north-south for Norma Avenue and east-west for Royal Lane. Where the alternatives come into play is whether or not to build a cul-de-sac street or to build a through street down to Floral Drive. The Council is considering either one alternative or the other. The streets will be standard bit~nous surfaced streets with concrete curb and gutter, 34 feet wide with a gravel base. I believe that completes this presentation. MR. POPOVICH: Mayor and members of the Council, the total published cost of this improvement was $247,lOO. It was petitioned for by the developers of Royal Hills, which is in excess of 35% of the affected property owners. The base plan of the project, including sanitary Sewer, watermain, storm drainage and streets, totals the high figure of $247,100. The alternate plan, with the cul-de-sac, would reduce that cost to $228,700, according to the engineer's report. I should point out that on page 6 of his feasibility report, he in- cludes capitalized interest for only six months. That is going to have to be changed to add an additional six months 2 . t ,. , . so that we have at least one year's capitalized interest. For example, if we were to go ahead and issue bonds and date them March 1 of 1982, our first interest would come due March 1 of 1983. six months' capitalized interest would not cover it because the assessments made this fall would not come in until next June. It's just one of those things that was overlooked. That slight amount of additional interest would have to be added. The current preliminary plat shows there are l6 lots, but there are two potential lots that are developable, which are adjacent to Lot 10 of Block 2, just south of Royal Lane. If we use a total of l8 lots, based on the base plan of $247,lOO, the assessments, if 100% assessed, would be $l3,728 per lot and if we use the alternate plan it would be $l2,706, approxi- mately $1,000 less. The idea is that if the project is approved, construction bids would be received this spring and construction would start this summer. Don thinks we could get the assessment roll in this fall so the first interest payment would commence beginning with real estate taxes collected next year. If that is the plan, we would then propose that this project be included with the others that are pending for financing and that later on this month we would have a resolu- tion before you covering all of the projects that are to be covered and we would have a bond sale roughly sometime by mid- March so that financing for this project, as well as the other ones that are pending, would be covered in one bond issue and you would have no need for any additional financing for the balance of the year. I would propose at that time to recommend, in view of the interest rate situation, that we have a tempo- rary bond issue, maturing three years from now. None of the bonds are going out over ten years now and they are all hitting l2%, which is the limit. In fact, Bond Buyer's Index is over 13% on the national level, which is the ceiling, as you know, in Minnesota. Most communities that are doing any financing now are doing it on a temporary basis. . As to over what period of time to include the assessments for the project, you might want to enter into a development agreement with the developer as to pay it back "in a three, four or five year period rather than spread it out over l5 or 20 years as we used to do because there's just no way we're going to accomplish this with assessments being over a longer period of time. That is something that will be considered at the time of the assessment hearing, but for purposes of at least some sideline discussion on it, our recommendation would be a three year bond issue and a development agreement to be worked out with the developer so that hopefully we wouldn't have to go into long term definitive financing much beyond the three year period. Under the new law, we do have the right to take care of temporary bond issues by another temporary bond issue, not to exceed three years, or final definitive financing.' Most communities today are financing over a ten year period. A few months ago it was 15. It's down to not 3 " t ,. . . more than 1993 and, of course, it means higher per year costs but we do save on interest because the overall period of time is cut down. With that, I'll be able to answer any questions, if there are any. This is assuming that there will be an assessment hearing this fall. MAYOR WOODBURN: I think he's pointed out the difference between an assessment hearing and ordering the improvement. Tonight is the start of the process that orders or does not order the improvement and this is not the assessment time. Of course, Mr. Popovich has painted, as he always does for us, the worst case. Mrs. McNiesh, do you have any written ques- tions or objections? MRS. McNIESH: There are none, your Honor. MAYOR WOODBURN: We will open the meeting then in a moment to comments from the audience. We're going to listen exten- sively. This is certainly for all of us (inaudible) and I don't think we can do right on this with everybody. I know we can't and I hope you all appreciate that fact. We will try to do right, however, even if we can't do right by everybody. I believe the Council will probably have quite a few questions but we'll go to the audience first for questions and comments. will each person, when they comment or ask questions, identify themself for the record. MRS. SUE HUSTINGS, 4136 Norma Circle: I have, first of all, a few questions and I want to hear what other people have to say, but first of all, I would like to know what the park dedication is from the contractor, Mr. Marcel Eibensteiner. Does anybody know what that is? .By law, I understand that it used to be that they had to dedicate 10% of the new development to the park in land or in money. I was wondering what that's going to be. MAYOR WOODBURN: It's usually been 10% - a slight variable figure - for parks or drainage improvements. MRS. SUE HUSTINGS: I understand that, but. that hasn't been decided yet, is that right? MAYOR WOODBURN: That's correct. That is still under nego- tiation. . MRS. SUE HUSTINGS: Another thing, I was wondering - why do they want to drain that low area in the park? That is a beautiful little pond that has beautiful oak trees around it, that would be a beautiful wild garden if the road didn't have to go through. I was wondering if they put that down there just so that we the taxpayers would feel that we're getting some- thing for our money. Is it necessary? 4 . > " . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The intent is not to really drain the pond dry. The intent is to provide overflow for the pond. Currently the pond rises about two to three feet before it flows naturally down to this area. It's just developed and graded to make somewhat of a dam across here and the water would rise higher in the pond and, as you well know, oak trees cannot survive high water. So the intent is to put a control here so the water will not reach a high level. MRS. SUE HUSTINGS: Because of the artificial homes that are going into the area - you're trying to save the trees. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: We're just trying to protect this so that it doesn't reach an unusually high level. MRS. SUE HUSTINGS: Also, I was wondering why the alterna- tive plan, with the cul-de-sac, is in the park rather than on private property. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That was at the direction of the Council - to show an alternative or cul-de-sac through the park. MRS. SUE HUSTINGS: Wouldn't it also be possible to have an alternative on private property rather than on public property? That is a possibility even though it isn't there? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: It's possible. MRS. SUE HUSTINGS: Also, it was stated that there were 18 divisions of this $247,000. I can see 16. Where are the other two? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The other two potential lots were just east of Lot 10 along this road. MAYOR WOODBURN: We don't have the planner here to answer some of these questions and I don't really like to answer too many of them (inaudible). Those two alternatives were thought to be the most feasible by the Council and the two to look at first. The reason was to provide access into the park- better access for people. . MRS. SUE HUSTINGS: I did talk to John Buckley and he said it isn't important to get access to this neighborhood park - that that was not one of the things that the Park Department felt was important. Therefore, he feels that (inaudible). I would like to be on record that that is not something that the Park Committee has wanted. MAYOR WOODBURN: We are aware of that, and the former statements still stand. Does anyone want to briefly add to the answer ,to that question since we don't have a professional answer? Any more comments? 5 . 1 . MR. MARCEL EIBENSTEINER, President of Royal Oaks Realty, Inc., Developer of Royal Hills: First of all, I have another question for Mr. Christoffersen on the storm sewer. The pond has an elevation of 962.2 and the street is at 962.5 - 5/10 off. Why can't I drain the pond onto the street and down the hill without bringing all the expensive storm sewer and catch basins - I'm going to move the whole storm sewer all the way down to the intersection, put in two catch basins and a pipe going down to the lower area, eliminate all the pipe in the intersection and all the way up to the ponding area, let the pond area overflow into the street. It would have to be only 5/10 off, otherwise just lower the street another 5/10 and then that pond would drain automatically down to the inter- section. I'm out to save money and I figure I could save $20,000 by eliminating the pipe from the pond to the inter- section. Is it necessary? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Yes, I believe it's necessary. This is roughly the area of the pond that. we're talking about and currently your street is coming in in this location, roughly in this vicinity, which will block part of the pond. You can see the natural drainage area that follows down through this area. It essentially drains down this way, down into a lower area. As this develops, obviously there will be a road sitting there as somewhat of a dam. It's not good practice to have water pond to the side, raised to an elevation that would slop over the curb into the street. That's not good practice. Another consideration could be - and we thought of this, but obviously we don't know the complete answer until we get into the design phase - it could be possible to create some fill to raise the bottom of this pond to where it's not holding water and the water runs off into that. low area, similar to the way water would run off of a lawn. That's acceptable. But to have water fill up in the pond and then slop over into the street that's unacceptable. MR. EIBENSTEINER: How about if I fill it up? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: We don't know at this point in time. MAYOR WOODBURN: The question arises - what is "it"? MR. EIBENSTEINER: Fill the pond. I think if I filled it in, it would only have a depth of about two feet. . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That could be. As I say, I'd rather have . . . MR. EIBENSTEINER: (Inaudible) fill it in to two feet and . . . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: (Inaudible) some elevations on the street. We don't have any complete data. We're still working with preliminary information right now. Rather than to not 6 ~ . have it in, I'd rather have it in - show it tonight - and then take it out later if it's not needed. To make it to the point where it's not needed, we'd have to fill in the pond to bring it up to an elevation where it would run off similar to a lawn. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: What was the elevation of the road again? MR. MARCEL EIBENSTEINER: 962.5. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Center of the road or curb? MR. EIBENSTEINER: Center of the road. And the pond is 962.2. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: You indicated that it is not what you consider a good design. What's the problem? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I wasn't concentrating on what he said the road elevation was. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: 962.5 against 962.2. The road is 3/l0 of a foot above . . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: What happens - first of all, he's basing it on the contour map. They could be off a foot or so. If this pond is lower than what shows on the contour map, even the way it is right now - you're talking two inches, three inches, four inches of water - the water would pond right up to the road surface and then flow over the boulevard 'area and into the road. That situation is not a good situation for drainage - to have open water filling into a large area and then spilling over into the road and running down the street to catch basins down below. If it was a grassy area - for instance, the pond could be filled up to a maximum level if you don't have an outflow. If you have a heavy storm, then all that water - you'd get lOO% runoff in that pond because it can't hold any more water, and it would just run right out into the street and down the street, where if ~t was lawn or turf there, you'd have an opportunity to run it off ahead of time. It wouldn't be ponding there and during the same type of heavy storm, you still wouldn't get lOO% runoff. . MR. GEORGE KRUEE, 4258 Norma Avenue: In the discussion about the road level, and earlier you mentioned the trees - where do the trees come in? If you allow natural runoff, the pond is going to fill up to a level at which it starts to run off. Where are the trees going to be involved in this? Are they going to be under high water then? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I really don't have the exact elevations on the trees. (Inaudible) that we use for deter- mining these elevations are very preliminary in nature now and it was taken off the aerial contour map. There were not any surveys made to determine contours at this time. 7 . . , MRS. SUE HUSTINGS, 4136 Norma Circle: One of the things I was interested in, after I thought people were going to start talking a little bit about this, is number one, I'm sure I'm one of the majority that don't want the road coming through Floral Drive for many reasons. However, if it were to come through, I would like to know how we are going to be compen- ,sated for the roadway that would be taken away from the park? Is there any allowance for it? I mentioned the dedication before - I understood that they used to have to payor give to the parks a certain amount and I don't know that before we've ever had to give to somebody else that has easy access to their development. I would like to know if there has been anything ever considered about that. Or if the road is just allowed to go through, what's going to be given to them? Also, if it did go through, who is going to pay to move the park equipment? We don't have much up there - we've waited a long time for the little bit that we have - and I would like to see, if it did go through, that it was put back in as good a shape or better shape than it was before. I think that should be a consideration. Another consideration is that by all these homes being brought in, Hamline Avenue is just a zoo. You can't get out there. If you haven't already planned it, I think you should plan to get a stoplight either on Colleen, the Briarknoll area, or somewhere. I know you can't do it on Floral Drive because the freeway would back it up. But that really should be a consideration, and soon. MAYOR WOODBURN: Some of your questions are rhetorical, which is perfectly fine. MRS. HUSTINGS: I don't know the answers. I feel you have a very hard job up there and you're not going to satisfy everybody, but if you can't satisfy us in one way, I don't want to be taken in two ways. MR. DELBERT JOHNSON, 1359 Colleen Avenue: In a previous meeting, there were various ideas discussed relative to emergency vehicle access in the event that a single road was put in down there. In the Briarknoll section, with that coming straight down Colleen, I'd be curious to' know what effect the last two major storms would have on those proper- ties - the new properties that would be sitting down in that area - with only one access out. I think that would put a tremendous strain on the people on Colleen and getting on Hamline Avenue during the rush hour. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I believe what you said, sir, is that if this was constructed without a through lane, the way out, primarily to Hamline Avenue, would be this long way out. Due to the recent weather conditions, it would be much more difficult to get out this way than it would be to come out like this. Is that correct? MR. JOHNSON: That's correct. 8 i . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: We have made a traffic study of the, area and obviously all of the traffic that is leaving at this area would be projected to leave (inaudible). I can't tell you the exact numbers right off the top of my head - I would have to look at the report - but I believe it was something like 200 cars difference. Maybe it was 400, I don't recall, but it would cut the traffic - by projecting it through here, it was projected that the traffic flow from here would be cut, but it would obviously be added here. As far as access to the site, starting right at this particular point - this is a long cul-de-sac street. This street connects to Snelling and Snelling goes out to 96. So we start at this point - consider that a cul-de-sac street, from here down - it's intensified by these two cul-de-sacs. If you could just take these two off and add them down here, it would end up being this long, theoretically, because you would have that many more houses. along the cul-de-sac street, with a lot of traffic moving in that direction. Also, there is a long dead-end street here. It's intensified by the fact that there are cul-de-sacs off of that without a loop. That's one of the reasons why the Council is considering the loop through the park. MAYOR WOODBURN: All these questions related to safety, and snow plows and clearing, I don't know if you want to com- ment on them. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Say we had some kind of blockage - a watermain break or something that would put a restriction on the street today, with the snow on the side - it would be extremely difficult to get down from one direction. That could occur. . MR. GERALD DREYLING, l377 Eide Circle: I think what we should have everybody looking at now is the traffic flow. There are probably going to be about l50 houses eventually in Briarknoll and there are l7 houses in the new division. Briarknoll basically has three exits planned - one through McClung, one next to McClung, and then Colleen Drive. In- dian Oaks I don't think you would consider a Briarknoll exit. . If you were to take and not consider a road through Floral Park, you will have 17 new units or houses added to the development's exits. About a lO% increase. If the people on Floral Drive, who now have a bad traffic situation - in fact, it's much worse than Colleen Drive - were to have that open - they have l7 houses, plus their 35, plus probably another 20 or so units because it's closer to go out Floral Drive (inaudible) which will probably double, possibly triple the traffic. The people on Colleen Drive will probably have an increase of ten or fifteen percent with this development. Granted, that is an increase, but it's only lO% or 15%. I assume the development design is planned so that they would have good access and exits from what they have now, dis- regarding the new development of Royal Hills. If you take and consider a double or triple flow on Floral Drive, it's kind of ludicrous to say that Colleen Drive should have a problem compared to Floral Drive. I consider that a strong 9 " . issue in saying that if you double or triple the flow on Floral Drive, you have a very serious traffic situation there that you will never be able to resolve. You'll have the possibility of more accidents, which I think can compensate for any kind of danger from the problem of fire trucks coming in or snow plows . going out. You have to consider the safety problems of that intersection - at Floral and Hamline - as being a very serious consideration that should probably negate any serious consider- ations for fire trucks having problems coming in and out - possibly losing five seconds if they have to go the long way. I looked at the map and any fire trucks that come from the Johanna or other fire departments can probably come in within five seconds difference, whether they go to Floral or Colleen, and possibly in the same time because there's a very quick entrance from Snelling if you go the New Brighton way, and it's probably quicker from the one on Highway 96 and Rice Street, if you come in and down Colleen to that small spot there. I don '.t think it's going to take much longer. If you want to check, you can, but I looked very carefully at the map. The only thing I consider a difference is the snow plows. The way they plow my cul-de-sac (inaudible). MAYOR WOODBURN: The Public Works Department keeps telling us not to make cul-de-sacs because they're so difficult to plow. So those of you who live on cul-de-sacs will have a problem, but hopefully the other advantages make up the dif- ference. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I can clarify the traffic. The cur- rent traffic on Floral Drive is approximately 400 vehicles per day, from both directions - this is without a connection - and from Colleen, the projected traffic is 1100 vehicles per day. If the road were placed through the park to Floral Drive, it is projected that the traffic on Floral Drive would double, up from 400 to 800, and that they would subtract the 400 vehicles from the 1100, or 700 vehicles per day that would go to Colleen. By putting it through, in effect you would have about a SO/50 traffic split. . MR. JOHN MINER, 4126 Norma Circle: I've lived for eight years in Arden Hills, I like it here, I think the Council and Planning Commission have done a good job. You've brought Mutual Service in, you brought Cardiac in, Land O'Lakes, and the City has to grow and I understand Marcel has to develop his property and I agree with all of those things because I'm in business for myself. But there has to be a time when you have to look at all of the things involved. It's very, very easy in this case just to say hey, for a fire problem or a snow problem, let's bring that through and let's charge the people and get it done. When you look at the map, it appears to me that there are 158 people that are eventually going to be living in this general area that we're talking about. 158 families. Forty of them live on Floral Drive, in that general area, and use that Hamline Avenue exit, which never used to be a problem, but we want Arden Hills to grow, we 10 , . need the. tax base, so we did add a few problems, which has really culminated into one big problem at Hamline and Floral Drive. . A problem so serious that someone is going to get killed some- day if we don't get the traffic light. We've already had, I. think, three accidents that were maybe before your time on the Council, but the people that live on that street know. When the people built on Colleen in that area, I feel very bad for them because they have a serious problem also. But they do have three exits to go through. I realize this is inconvenient to go through this exit and through McClung and through Colleen, but you all know, to get on the freeway, what we have to go through to get on Hamline to get to 694 going north. It is a problem to exit. So they already have three exits. We have one. Their properties aren't all developed yet. They have some of the property developed, but their problem isn't as serious as it's going to be. It will get more serious. We have all of our property developed and we can't really face any more serious of a problem in that area. I don't see how, in good judgment - and we're projecting this traffic, we don't even know what it is - we know we have a serious problem now and we're just saying it's going to become more serious. I don't see how they could even possibly consider running that through to Floral Drive. Not because it's going to hurt us - I live there, I don't mind that. I understand that you have to do some things. I think you have to consider the fact that we can't get out now on Hamline. The people on Colleen -they have a problem - but at least they have two other ways to go. They can go out and turn right on 96. We can't do that. When those cars come whistling down Hamline, remember - Hamline and Floral Drive are just less than a half a block when the freeway splits - you know, when it comes together - and boy, I tell you, they come shooting down there like race cars. It's a problem if you have two or three people waiting to get out. Believe me, you start taking unnecessary chances to get out of there because you have to almost come to a running stop at the corner to make it out. In the winter time it's even worse. If you consider putting that street through here somehow to get onto Floral Drive, I think along with the consideration you have to put a semaphore there. I don't think there's another way. I think it will be until somebody gets krlled and then it will be too late. The other alternative is to not put it through at all, which I think, at this time, possibly makes more sense. It costs' a lot of money and who is it really going to benefit? We've had sporadic meetings with the Council and we try to come to them all and we really don't get a full pic- ture. Do we really need it? Is it absolutely necessary? Is it going to save lives to do that or is it going to take lives? I think that's really important. I just wish that you would consider - I know you're not going to vote tonight, but if there are 40 people who live in this area and all 40 people ask you not to put that through, would that make a difference? We're the ones that are going to be affected, we're the ones that live there. These people that moved in, moved in later. They had no more idea than the man in the moon that this road was ever going to come through until Marcel asked for that . 11 " road. I don't think it's fair. There was no reason - we never knew that road was going to come through. . COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: I have one comment by the same token - if it's so dangerous to turn out on Floral Drive, if the road connection is put through, then you on Floral Drive also have the alternative of taking the long way out and around too. MR. MINER: I appreciate that. I'm just saying that things are just fine the way they are. Is it necessary to complicate matters? Are we gaining a lot by doing that? I think that's what we're here to talk about. A lot of money is going to be spent and Marcel wants to develop that land properly and we want the proper plan for the City. Yes, I appreciate the fact that we can go out that way. Absolutely. MRS. MONICA TUGGLE, 4126 James Circle: I have a little letter from my daughter here concerning the park down there. She feels the same way as about 50 other kids that live in that area. Right now it's safe for the kids to ride their bicycles across the street and everything else. When that road is put through, a lot more traffic is coming through there and the kids won't have any safe place to play and go to the park. Right now I feel my daughter is old enough to go down there by herself - she's ten - but with increased traffic, I don't think any child should be on that road. I counted 30 kids, ten and younger, living right between James Circle and Floral, in that area. Also, there is no west exit to the freeway, so if any- body thinks of coming through there with ambulances, snow plows or fire engines, most of the hospitals that are downtown, you have to take 35W or even go up to 10 to take 96. There is no throughway otherwise. You would have to go all the way to Lexington to even find a way out to go to a freeway. I don't think it's a very good idea to put a road through there. Thank you. MR. TIM TUGGLE, 4126 James Circle: Has any consideration been made to the condition of Floral Drive if that road does . go through there? Right now that road isn't wine enough to maintain constant two way traffic like that. It's a typical dead-end street, narrow - it would have tOLWidened. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I'm just taking a shot in the dark, but I would say it's somewhere around 30 feet - 28 to 30 feet. . MR. TUGGLE: When you drive down it, it doesn't seem like a normal-width road. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: The roadway is about 28 feet. MR. TUGGLE: Is that normally wide enough to have a car parked on it and still have two way traffic going by it? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Normally it takes about the mini- mum is II foot traffic lanes. So you're talking 22 feet, 12 . subtract that from the 28, you'd have six feet. . MR. TUGGLE: l~ich is narrower than a car. I know you can't do it because there are cars parked along there and you have to wait for the oncoming car to go by before you can go. This is in the summer too. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Village standards on improved streets are 34 feet. MR. TUGGLE: Does that mean they're going to widen Floral Drive? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That's up to the Council. MR. DELBERT JOHNSON, 1359 Colleen Avenue: I see a very emotional issue before you. I don't see any real solution, like a number of people are stating, to the problem. We have children and access to the park. We appreciate Floral Park, we don't want to damage Floral Park, nor do we want any of our kids to be injured going to Floral Park. An increased traffic flow on Colleen Avenue is a risk to our children getting to Floral Park - we have the same problems you people have. We have the same common goal - safety. That's one thing. But now we have an economic issue involved and they're talking about $247,000, plus widening Floral Drive. In Everett Dirkson's terms, a billion dollars here and billion dollars there, pretty soon you're starting to talk about real money. Maybe we're starting to talk about real money here now. All of these con- siderations, someone is obviously going to have to pay for them. RITA SCHUNICHT, 1469 Colleen Avenue: I have a couple of questions. First of all, as far as the assessments for the road through the park - I'm wondering who would pay for that and I'm wondering if it would make a difference if the people on Colleen Avenue would express a desire to help with that, considering that we are paying for something that will benefit us in terms of reduced traffic. My other question is - regarding the traffic on Floral and Hamline - ~ believe there was something brought up last time about another alternative for helping to ease that. I'm wondering if we could have that repeated. . MR. POPOVICH: There are 18 lots that would be benefitted and they would be the ones that would be assessed for this. Unless the City Council put some of it on general taxes - then you would get more than Colleen - you'd get the rest of the City as part of the project. Is Colleen in the assessment area? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: No. MR. POPOVICH: either, so there's lots and then some They're not in the area that was published no way we can say we'll put some on the 18 on the other ones, because they were never 13 " . included as benefitted property within the legal description that was published. Legally, at this point, based on the way it is now, it couldn't be done unless you started over again, assuming you felt it was benefitted. Then' that's a real ques- tion - how much is it benefitted? Then you get the appraisal situation and all the other stuff - I'm not so sure there is a benefit up there that is so significant that you could assess them for it. MAYOR WOODBURN: The City is very hard pressed for money this year - we could accept donations. MR. POPOVICH: If they voluntarily donate it, that would be another thing. My experience has been you get one or two and the rest don't. RITA SCHUNICHT: About the other alternative on Hamline and Floral, the other alternative for easing the traffic flow. MAYOR WOODBURN: I guess you're specifically referring to some widening, perhaps, or some improvement like that. Mr. Christoffersen, do you have anything further to say on that? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: We really haven't looked into it thoroughly. We did look into widening the west side of Hamline Avenue, somewhat trying to create a merge lane. That type of situation usually isn't done. You may think it's high volume traffic, but it really isn't considered high volume when you're in the traffic business. For instance, there is a merge lane right now off ,of Colleen - when they had their projected traffic (inaudible). I suspect that when Hamline Avenue is improved, Hamline Avenue would be widened~, Several years ago the Council did consider widening Hamline Avenue and it was not accomplished because many people were opposed to it. It was discussed to widen it to either 36 or 44 feet at the time. I think the current standards for widening Hamline would be probably 46 or 36 feet. The 36 would 'have restricted parking on one side. That intersection, as far as semaphores - I'd like to ans~er that question with some comments about traffic signals on Floral Drive and Hamline. That particular portion of Hamline Avenue is controlled by the State of Minnesota. If there are any traffic signals put up in that location, the State of Minnesota would be involved in it. . MAYOR WOODBURN: What is the cost of a signal? CHRISTOFFERSEN: That's kind of out of my ballgame. I'd have to go to my traffic engineer. I'll take another shot in the dark - $85,000 to $IOO,OOO. MR. MARCEL EIBENSTEINER: At what point will it be determined what part of the assessments are my portion when the street runs through the park? 14 MAYOR WOODBURN: When will that be determined? At the assessment hearing. . MR. POPOVICH: The idea is that after'the project is all in, then you have a firm idea of what the total costs are. Right now these are just projections. At that time a preliminary assessment roll is prepared and the people will all get notices for another hearing. At that time we would know exactly what would be assessed. The engineer would have to get all of these things together as to what those costs are and then assess your lot. MR. EIBENSTEINER: I must admit, you shocked me this evening when you mentioned it, when you took the total cost and divided it by 18 lots. In other words, I'm paying for the complete street through the park. I don't want the street and I don't want the cul-de-sac. I'd just as soon stop right at the end of my property. If the street has to go through the park completely and I have to pay for a complete street - or all of the assessments - I can't afford it. It's up to $13,000 something per lot for assessments. By that time it just be- comes unfeasible to plat the rest of the area. A couple of months ago, I was always under the impression that the Village would share, or the Park Board or somebody would share in the cost of the street. If I have to bear the whole cost by myself, I just really can't afford to go ahead with the project. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: (Inaudible) $12,OOO. MR. EIBENSTEINER: I had figured I'd give half the cul-de- sac for park dedication and the other half would be shared (inaudible). But the total cost, putting the whole street through, runs $37,000. I can't afford that. But the thing is, when will this be decided? I don't want to put all the improve- ments in and then come to the meeting and have them say I get all the assessments. Then it's too late. . MR. POPOVICH: That's the purpose of the meeting tonight the feasibility of the project. Feasibility so far as layout, safety, and estimated costs. We're 99% within the ballpark so far as the costs are concerned. If you feel the project is not feasible - the engineer, in his report, has said it is feasible, even with those economic costs. $12,000 or $13,000 is not unusual for lots for complete utilities and streets. In fact, I've seen them $15,000, $16,000, $17,000, $20,000. That varies. That's a judgment you have to make. If you feel, knowing what you have in the land, that this on top of it makes it too much, then you ought to tell the Council - I don't think the project is feasible. This is a feasibility hearing, to be voted up or down as to whether it's feasible, considering everything - projected costs, layout, safety, everything else. Only you can make that decision. That's why the Council is holding the hearing. 15 " MR. EIBENSTEINER: Will the Council tell me this evening, or at a later date, if they'll share in the cost of the street or if it's absolutely my cost? When will I find that out? . MAYOR WOODBURN: Legally, we don't know until the assess- ment hearing, as Mr. Popovich has indicated. MR. POPOVICH: We're going on the basis of 100% assessed - that you were going to pay it all. You want to go on that basis in making your response. Now, whether the Council deter- mines to put part of it on general taxes or part of it out of some other fund and then just assess - I've seen 90j10, 80/20 - 80% assessed, 20% on taxes - it varies. But itJs your job to convince the Council. Our recommendation is that you're developing the land, it's your land, that normally developers pay 100%. MR. EIBENSTEINER: the plat is approved? the assessment hearing will I find out at a later date, when Or can I find out ahead of time, before next fall? MAYOR WOODBURN: I think as a practical matter the Council has commonly had an idea of which way they're going before the assessment hearing. They have to in order to judge the feasibility of it. That idea is not a legal idea and is not binding, but it's an assumption of the way things could go to make it feasible, if it should be feasible. In other words, we will, I presume, have some idea of the feasibility of this based on what you're saying, which reflects then into the financing of it at the time we approve the plat. That is an idea and it's not binding and I'm sure that you're aware of that. It never has been in anything that you do, except some things have been a little clearer cut. I don't know how to answer it any better than that. I expect we'll have an idea of which way we'll go. You're telling us that $l2,700 would be feasible - that's the cul-de-sac. e. MR. EIBENSTEINER: I was figuring half the cul-de-sac price. The cul-de-sac price right now is $20,000. I figured $10,000 plus the regular assessment. At the same time, I was going to cut the storm sewer down to $23,000 from $45,000. I have to work that out with Don. I just don't like to spend storm sewer money when no water goes down the storm sewer. I have a place on Nursery Hill Court right now, I put a lot of money in Nursery Hill Court and there's a storm sewer there that never drains water. I want to make sure this project doesn't end up the same way. I can live with half the cul-de- sac. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Before we can go with this tonight, I guess I'd like to get a little bit more into the storm sewer drainage to find out what this is all about. MR. BOB VOSIKA, 4268 Norma Avenue: I have a question related to the land use within the park, for either the 16 cul-de-sac or the through street. I think there was an estimate that with the street was around 4/10 of At the last meeting, I recall, the total acreage to be used an acre. Is that correct? . MAYOR WOODBURN: I think the figure was about that. MR. BOB VOSlKA: One of the things I would like to bring up - I live in the Briarknoll development and we do have very limited access to the park right now. There is a plan for a through- path through to the park, but in actuality all it is is a graded path right now and we're very dependent on the weather as to whether we can get in the park or not. Last summer, actually, myself and my family had to go around'on Hamline Avenue in order to get in on the south side of the park in order to get into Floral Park. Right now, there is very limited access for the people in Briarknoll to get into the park. Also, in talking with some of the neighbors, the park is a very beau- tiful park, but in actuality we feel it is too secluded. A lot of people are not comfortable with letting their young children go over to the park, children under ten years old. In reality, it's too secluded. I feel the access with the street - where people can either come in on the street, get higher visibility and as far as a safer park for the children - I feel it would be much better. The other issue related to the use of the park - the park, in my understanding, has a total of in excess of 20 acres. I know there were some people that were concerned about using up good park space, but in reality, 4/10 of an acre is about only 2% of the total park use. I really don't think that's an issue, as far as being able to feed the actual traffic, recreational traffic into the park. One of the other issues I would like to cover is that there are approximately 95 residential lots within Briarknoll. I think 25 of them are inhabited now. As far as the people partici- pating with the Council tonight, there are really only 25% of the people that can participate and 75% that will be future residents. I'd like to speak for the people that are now residents in Briarknoll and also the additional 75 residents that would like to be able to use the park. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Your Honor, the acreage that would be taken up by the paved surface, with concrete curb and gutter, is about half an acre - about 550 feet long. MAYOR WOODBURN: Have there been any other figures put forth, that you are aware of? . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: 4/10 is what I estimated the last time. MAYOR WOODBURN: As far as how it affects the park? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Not that I'm aware of. I think ,he Council discussed it at a meeting, about the percent of usage by the people in the area. 17 . . ADELE ANDERSON, Park Department: Insofar as how it effec- tively affects the park, I think that's a matter of judgment. Fortunately, I didn't bring my slides, as I did at the last meeting, to show you what my attitudes were as to cul-de-sacs in the park. I felt it affected quite a lot - a whole section of the park - the whole front area, insofar as how it was used and if it could be used at all. I realize that's a matter of judgment. Insofar as getting into the park from Briarknoll, the Park Department was constantly on the developer of Briar- knoll to get that access cleaned up so that we could, in fact, develop that access. Developers move very slowly. Therewas a mound of dirt there, it seemed like years and years, and we kept asking them and they said eventually it would be done. They finally did get it graded down so this year we will be able to put a decent path through there so you can take your bike or go by foot or whatever. It will be a fine access. That's not a problem. The delay was not the fault of the Park Department - that was the developer. I had figured it was more like two acres that it affected the park. But, like I say, that's a matter of judgment. .. MR. GERALD DREYLING, 1377 Eide Circle: I would like to speak again with regard to the park. We try to develop parks in Arden Hills as neighborhood parks. The idea of a neighbor- hood park is to be secluded. There are very few of them that have the real seclusion of Floral Park. It has some drawbacks in that it creates problems for very young children, so there has to be supervision, but it has some positive aspects in that you can take your family there, sit down, and deliberately have a quiet time together, without anybody corning in and in- truding, unless they come and do the same thing and have a good time. There's very little outside influence that bothers you. Bringing the road in, you completely eliminate that. You'll have a flow of traffic through there and you won't have that seclusion any more. It bothers me to think that we're going to set a precedent by cutting a road right through the prime part of one of our parks. It may very well happen again. I think it has to be some kind of a development that needs, a road through it because we feel it's necessary for fire safety or plows. I think we have a very special park: I enjoy going there. I'm prejudiced - I'd like to go there all the time. I'd hate to see the park literally cut up, as it would be. The best part of the park would be cut up. There are many parts of the park on other sides, but they're not as (inaudible). There's a lqt of swampland in Floral Park. We have a problem right now that I might as well address - the south drainage of the south ponding area .is plugged' since last summer. I just thought I'd mention that to see if Rice Creek Watershed wants to do something about it. It may have been somebody below with equipment that plugged it because I saw that they had put the dirt right over the side where the cul- vert is. I talked to John, but he can't do much about it until spring. There is a drain that goes down toward Gale Circle, I think it is. I believe the drainage is supposed to go down there. It is plugged. 18 MAYOR WOODBURN: We'll make a note of that and have it looked at. . ADELE ANDERSON: Could I address the part about park dedi- cation? The Park Committee feels that the cul-de-sac being put in the park would sort of be to the convenience of Mr. Eibensteiner and now he's telling us that he's going to give us part of that as dedication. We never really asked for it and we'd kind of like to have money instead so that we can do some new things in the park. Am I hearing that this is to be our dedication? The cul-de-sac? MR. EIBENSTEINER: I hope so. ADELE ANDERSON: Mr. Eibensteiner, but the pond. Apparently he wants. I don't like that. I have nothing against I hear him saying he's going to fill up he thinks it's his land, to do with what MR. EIBENSTEINER: I really didn't mean that. I could fill up the pond. I don't want the storm sewer. That's all. ADELE ANDERSON: If you're thinking of dedication, we would like to think in other terms. MAYOR WOODBURN: I have two items I would like to ask about. We do have a cul-de-sac in a park - Mrs. Zehm, I believe you're familiar with that (inaudible). How was that handled? MRS. DOROTHY ZEHM: That was handled as park dedication for Karth Lake, built by the developer in our park, as park dedication for that development. MAYOR WOODBURN: Another somebody - the feasibility of does somebody have the figure Arden Oaks was projectJ at? question I have to address to Arden Oaks, I believe it is - on what the cost per lot in .. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: to be $15,600 per lot MR. OSWALD TSCHIDA, 1445 Floral Drive: I don't like to see the road go through the park either' because the road would go past my garage about fifteen feet away. Who wants to have a street that close? The assessments there are going MRS. UDAGER, 4255 Norma: I use the park a lot. I love to ski and it is kind of hard to get down in there, but I hear that is going to be cleared. I have one problem - we work in the day time and it's dark in there. I'm used to parks where there are lights. Why are we so against lights? I went skiing the other night and I must say, it did frighten me a little. Everybody says that I'm crazy to go out there. Why 19 . are we all saying this? Is it wise to have lights? I know a lot of children go out there. There's nothing finer that going out sleigh riding at night. Walking in the evenings, a lot of us don't get the chance except on weekends. The evening lights were beautiful over in Shoreview when I lived there. I used to go night skiing all the time because there were lights. Is that against the principles? I hear we don't have any street lights because people don't want them. Everyone I talk to wants them, so I'd like to know who doesn't want street lights. MAYOR WOODBURN: Can we note your comments? Perhaps they don't go toward this improvement. MRS. UDAGER: Yes. You were talking about using ~e park and that's why I wanted to bring that up. Doesn't it ~mprove the park to use it? I've been over in the park - that's what I was going to get at - how many times, and I see very few people over there and I think it's too nice of a park not to use. Very few people have I seen, and I'm over there an awful lot. I guess that was the brunt end of my remarks. I think we should use it - it's beautiful. . MR. WILLIAM BERNTSEN, 1479 Colleen Avenue: I really appreciate the traffic problems the folks have down here. On Hamline - I think I was about the second citizen to move into Briarknoll No. I and there really has hardly been a morning when I haven't had to - sad to say this - make some driver rather irate after about three or four minutes, coming out on Colleen, sneak in between a couple of cars, and all the head- lights were blinking at me from the rear end. Whether there is one or two or three here, citizens coming into the Briar- knoll No.1 area, we all have similar problems exiting onto Hamline. I think the real issue before the Council here is . . . (Changed Tape) . . . I don't think it's reasonable for anyone to subject them, if suddenly something should be a problem here, to go clear 'out to 96, back over to Hamline and down. I really feel that if this plat - I'm not sure whether it's been approved or not or whether it's in the process - is going to be approved, that these citizens should be given equal access to this and I think the citizens who will even- tually reside here, too, should have opportunity to exit either way. It really is a matter of the welfare and well- being and safety of the people here, in terms of access to the streets. I really feel that approving anything in here - in fact it should have been thought of here - demands equality of access in traffic in both areas. MRS. NANCY KLEINMAN, 4242 Norma Avenue: I would like to address the issue of safety for the children. We have a young child, and I brought her over to the park on several occasions and felt very frightened about the seclusion of the park. It's very, very secluded. I think that if we would have a street it would help. Children don't belong in streets, 20 > > . they shouldn't be playing in them, but I do feel that opening up that area by having a street there would not only increase our access to the park, but increase the safety for our chil- dren. ' MR. GARY RIPPENTROP, 4120 Norma Circle: Back to what this gentleman was asking about on Floral Drive - I can appre- ciate what the gentleman said a moment ago on Colleen. I think when you do look at that area, I think that you have to, number one, realize that it has not been platted - you're only looking at it at this particular moment - thinking also that those houses that are along Floral - for example, I've been there for nine and a half years now - it's been set quite a period of time and all of a sudden, as Mr. Christoffersen mentioned, you double that traffic flow out on to Hamline, you must have to, as he indicated, you look at that street and where it is a 28 foot street right now, there must be at some point that you do have to expand that or do something to accommodate the additional traffic flow through there. If you're looking at the feasibility, which Pete was mentioning on the whole process, I think you have to also look at that and again, remembering that those homes have been there for a long period of time, most of them in that area, and all of a sudden we're going to develop that. As the gentleman before indicated, I think maybe it should have been looked at in that second development right before Briarknoll Drive, in there, but there are those different accesses and they ask about a restriction that occurs on one of the avenues up there. I think the same restriction occurs if there's something on Floral - there is no way out at this particular point that the exits have to go there. There are those additional exits up above there and so I think you have to look at the width of that street, as well as that traffic there. I also believe, at prior Council meetings, we talked about possibly an alternative coming out on Hamline. As I recall, the State controls north of Floral Drive. Does it not? In other words, the point is, I don't think you, as a Council, or Arden Hills, can do anything about widening it at that par- ticular point. Wouldn't that have to go to the State to widen that, or some kind of State approval? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: They have State approval. . MR. RIPPENTROP: As the gentleman from Colleen said, yes, there is a problem on Hamline Avenue and complicated by the snow. There used to be, as Mr. Miner was saying before, you came to the stop sign and unfortunately you didn't really stop, you just sort of try to gauge it and shoot on out there. When you're around that 7:30 area, there is an immense amount of traffic coming through there, maybe further compli- cated by Cardiac pacemaker's driveway being immediately through' there. That's a straight shot from Floral right straight over to their driveway, so now when an opening does occur and there's someone coming out of Cardiac Pacemaker, I've sat there for three, four, five, six minutes waiting for someone to come and all of a sudden there's a little 21 . . , opening and it's sort of like when two people are walking at each other - first they both move this way, then that way - you both start out onto the street and the~ have to stop because both of you are trying to get out there and go to the south area there. It really does create a problem and then you complicate it by doubling that traffic coming there. I think that's something you really have to take a look at because that really does create a problem going through there, if that street comes around through there. Also, if that occurs, at what point do you have to widen Floral Drive or improve Floral Drive? I assume if that happens, then that assessment would immediately come back onto our citizens along Floral Drive. We're talking about that street being on the developer (in- audible) . MR. GREGORY QUARFOTH, 1397 Indian Oaks Court: I have two small children too, but to me the primary safety issue is still the intersection on Floral Drive and Hamline. TO me, there is seclusion in the park, but it is a park, not a play- ground. I like the seclusion. I just don't think that Floral and Hamline will take that kind of traffic flow and I just don't think you can bank on the State saying they'll put a stop sign up there. I also agree that the traffic problem on Colleen is bad. I think there should be a stop sign or some- thing there to help traffic flow along there. But I still think the primary safety issue is at Floral Drive and Hamline. It ',s more likely I'll have an accident and kill one of my kids there than they'll be hurt in the park. MR. MICHAEL OLSON, 4107 Gale Circle: First of all, I'd like to know why putting a road through a park makes it safer. The second thing, has somebody looked at the possibility of a three way stop up at Colleen? At least they'd get a chance to legally get out on Hamline. The other thing it would do is slow down Hamline. Nobody goes 45 miles an hour on Hamline. That 55 miles an hour from Snelling goes right to 96. It did wonders at F and Lexington. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I guess I really can't comment on that. County Road F and Lexington is a four way stop. MAYOR WOODBURN: That's where $80,000 worth of semaphores went in. MR. OLSON: Well, it helped. MRS. UDAGER, 4255 Norma: You said no bike riding on Hamline - how do you get out of Briarknoll and that area if you can't ride your bike across? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: As far as a stop sign on Hamline Avenue, I'd just have to take that under consideration and make recommendations back to the Council. MAYOR WOODBURN: What does it do to the speed? 22 , . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: It would probably reduce the speed when people got used to it. The first initial shock could create more accidents that you're willing to face. I guess I really don't know the answer at this time.' , MAYOR WOODBURN: Were there several studies quoted out of your traffic engineer's office, on speed 400 feet from stop signs? I believe there were. There are several articles out of traffic engineering studies, actual studies made, that 400 to 500 feet from stop signs, the average speed increased. People over-speed once they have to stop. MR. MICHAEL OLSON: At least it would give'them a chance to get onto Hamline. MRS. MONICA TUGGL~, 4126 James Circle: Why is everyone using the Hamline exit? Everyone that works at Land O'Lakes and Control Data, why can't they go down - a lot of people work downtown. Do they have to go down Snelling? (Inaudible) MAYOR WOODBURN: .The traffic is 5300 AnT on Hamline MRS. NANCY OLSON, 4107 Gale Circle: I just have one question I'd like to ask. I lived in another area and when you come to a spot like this where there is so much emotion and 'everybody wants something, you have to get outside help to come in and solve the problem. Has that ever been considered? Even though it cost a little bit, it did help. MAYOR WOODBURN: We have had three outside people - consultants - help us on this. We have had our eng1neer, who is a consultant to us. He's not, the village engineer, as such, he works for the village - Mr. Christoffersen. We have had a highway specialist from Short-Elliott tell us about the traffic flow. We've had our consultant from (inaudible) and Chapman tell us whether it's good, general planning and maybe somebody else. We've had 'the fire chief comment to us and we've had the Ramsey County police comment to us. Anything else? We have our own internal groups, of course, but as far as hiring consultants or people that are not working for the Village, we'd have to pay them. . ADELE ANDERSON, Park Department: I have a question about your last comments. Can you share with us any recommendations or any of the information that Mr. Christoffersen and the other planners you mentioned, the other consultants that have given you information - did they make a recommendation either way? MAYOR WOODBURN: They all did. The traffic consultant merely gave us some figures. Beyond that, Mr. Christoffersen, would you like to comment on your recommendation from an engineering viewpoint? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Based on the length of both Norma Avenue and Flor~l Drive and considering the input, the traffic 23 . .. engineer did advise and I made the recommendation that Floral Drive should be connected to Royal Lane. Based on that recom- mendation and the length of the cul-de-sacs, one of the things the traffic engineer stated, in addition to the traffic figures I read off earlier, was that he did not see any particular in- crease in the traffic problem - real heavy traffic problems. There again, traffic engineers look at traffic differently than a resident would. They're looking at large volumes. As far as Floral Drive or Colleen Avenue, these two streets are really not that unusual, although individual people are having problems. The real problem seems to be - and what I'm hearing tonight - is Hamline Avenue. Access onto Hamline Avenue - it's a narrow street. In the future, when Hamline Avenue is up- graded, I would suspect it would be widened to a point where people would have 'better access. A good example of that is Lexington Avenue South. I don't know if any of you have driven that or had driven it prior to the widening, but just by the fact of widening Lexington Avenue, it made it much easier to drive. It made it much easier for people living by Lexington Avenue to get on and off. There was a lot of concern about how wide that street was going to be. But it has proved to be pretty satisfactory to move traffic. MAYOR WOODBURN: Mrs. Zehm, can you paraphrase for us the planner's recommendation? MRS. ZEHM: I don't know if I can paraphrase it, but I think he recommends pretty strongly that the road connection be made because of extremely long cul-de-sacs and for the movement of school buses and fire trucks and police. MAN IN AUDIENCE: Who is Glen Wormer? MAYOR WOODBURN: Glen Van Wormer works with Short-Elliott- Hendrickson. He did work with the State of Minnesota as a regional traffic engineer. I think he may have been the head traffic engineer. He's the one that wrote the traffic report. MAN IN AUDIENCE: Because he says right here that he ' found the traffic did not demand such a connec~ion for effi- ciency or safety. He also stated that virtually all emergency service vehicles come from Hamline into the development. The access is not absolutely needed. That would contradict . . . MAYOR WOODBURN: There are two reports from him. MAN IN AUDIENCE: I'm reading the latest one. ADELE ANDERSON" Park Department: I don't mean to be picking on Mr. Eibensteiner, but is he planning to pay to the parks fund the monies that would be necessary to restore the park, to move the facilities that exist now, to redesign or whatever we have to do to replan the park, to make it what we consider somewhat restored and somewhat useful? We do have a little problem in the front area, conflicting with the 24 . hard surface court that is there now. We would have to move the play structure away from the street that would go in there. We haven't even talked about the amount of land that would be given to him. We've talked about what he's giving to us, but we haven't even talked about the acres that we would be giving to him for the road. How is that going to be resolved? MR. EIBENSTEINER: Do I have to answer that? I guess at this time - I'm not in favor of paying for the whole street. I'd like to pay for a partial street or a partial cul-de-sac. Other than that, I have no plan to pay for restoration of the park. That's where I'm at right now. MRS. SUE HUSTINGS, 4136 Norma Circle: I think the Council is aware of the fact that Marcel is a businessman, he's been doing this a long, long time and he's never going to tell you he's going to give you as much as he expects to give. That is elementary. What she is saying is that we are giving this. This is for his use. He is going to get in excess of $30,000 per lot. The difference between him putting in the extra road, according to your figures, is approximately $29,000, which is a small percentage of that (inaudible) because of the way he pays his property taxes (inaudible). He knows where every dollar is going and I know that you're going to keep that in mind when you decide what the park dedication will be. MAYOR WOODBURN: He's a businessman so we intend to give him the business. Are there any new ideas? .. MR. MICHAEL OLSON, 4107 Gale Circle: This may not be a new idea because I'm going to re-emphasize what the person from Indian Oaks Court said about the primary problem here is the safety at West Floral Drive and Hamline. That is indeed the primary problem and I heard from the traffic people here that it may be resolved when we widen the street. With our austerity program, I'm not sure that that will ever come, especially from the state; and I don't believe that Arden Hills may take it upon themselves to do any widening in the streets. Again, it's just a re-emphasis of the gentleman from Indian Oaks. He hit it right on the head. . MR. DOUGLAS COULL, 1365 Eide Circle: Someone mentioned that there are emotions involved. This is certainly true. I came out here because I like it out here. It's quiet, except for a little rumble from 694. I like that park just exactly the way it is. My wife and I go walking there, there happens to be a path for us the way we come from Eide Circle on down to Floral, without getting run over - we're real careful - and we enjoy it. I suppose maybe that's not a forward-looking progressive view, but nevertheless, I like it the way it is - just the way it is. Secluded or not, it's a delightful park. I fail to understand how a cul-de-sac is going to improve the park at all. I'm sympathetic to the gentleman who is expanding and building out there - that's what keeps the country going. 25 . , , Nevertheless, I want to emphasize that I like it the way it is. Thank you. . MAN IN AUDIENCE: If we're going to get that road crammed down our throat, has anybody looked at' the possibility of just ending Royal Oak Development, or whatever it is, right there and ending Norma Avenue right where those two cul-de-sacs come across and not have a thoroughfare? We would have a little increase and they would have a little increase. MAYOR WOODBURN: I think you're referring to isolating or cutting off Royal.oaks. MAN IN AUDIENCE: Have Royal Oaks only going onto Floral Drive. MAYOR WOODBURN: In other words, what you're referring to (Changed Tape) . . . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: ... lengthen the length of the cul-de-sac street. You're shortening one cul-de-sac and making Floral Drive longer. If it was cut off right here, this cul-de-sac street would, in effect, be shorter, but this one wou+d then be longer. MAN IN AUDIENCE: Why would it be any longer? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: If it loops through, you do not have a cul-de-sac. We have short cul-de-sacs along here. This would be a long dead-end street. MAN IN AUDIENCE: I would end Norma Avenue right there - straight across from where that road goes. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I'm still saying - if this ended right here, it would still be a long dead-end street from right here, clear up to there. ' MAN IN AUDIENCE: You could change that lot arrangement. . MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Because of the terrain on these lots, the developer has submi tted at least two plans that I am aware of, to try to develop the area and it's pretty restricted because it has pretty steep slopes. MAN IN AUDIENCE: I think it's an alternative to look at because I think it would make both sides a little happier if that road has to go through, which I don't think it has to. MAN IN AUDIENCE: Are there any guidelines for the length of cul-de-sacs, as it relates to what the Council has used before or any municipality uses and does this go beyond those normal guidelines? 26 . , . , . COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Under the Arden Hills code having to do with subdivisions, under the statement on cul-de-sacs, the maximum length for cul-de-sac streets shal;L be 500 feet, measured along the centerline of the intersection of origin to the end of right-of-way unless there are 18 or less lots abutting the cul-de-sac. Each cul-de-sac shall be provided at the closed end with a turn-around having an outside total diameter of at least 100 feet and a street/property line diameter of at least 120 feet. MAN IN AUDIENCE: So this, in fact, is longer than the 500 feet to the right-of-way that is normally prescribed? In the past, have you deviated within the village of Arden Hills from that ordinance? COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Not under that ordinance,. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: Isn't Floral Drive (inaudible)? COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Floral was there before the ordinance. MAYOR WOODBURN: There are deviations, depending on how you look at it. In other words, two outstanding deviations are right here (inaudible) except there we built fire lanes between so they're not true cul-de-sacs. There may be one or two 'others since this ordinance was passed. MAN IN AUDIENCE: When was that passed? MAYOR WOODBURN: Perhaps I should correct myself. I said since that ordinance was passed - that provision has been in at least two zoning ordinances that I know of. I don't know when the first one was passed. It was more than six years ago. . MAN IN AUDIENCE: On~ of the issues from the report from the consultant did state that final decision regarding the connection will probably rest with the cost of the connection, the desirability of eliminating two cul-de-sacs, desirability of providing alternate access for convenience and emergencies and the impact on existing plots. I think there he is implying that the fact that this plan to not connect it through would give the two long cul-de-sacs. I think that's an issue here, where there's a safety issue of access for the fire equipment and for emergency vehicles to get into the new development and also actually providing better alternate access to Floral Drive, should there be a problem on Hamline. MR. JOHN MINER, 4126 Norma Circle: When will you vote on this? You're discussing this tonight. Does this come up for a vote at the next Council meeting? MAYOR WOODBURN: It would be up to the Council to deter- mine tonight. They could vote on it tonight or they can postpone it for quite a long period of time. 27 . " , MR. JOHN MINER: There are now four Council members. So will those four Council members vote on this issue? There won't be a fifth one added? tt MAYOR WOODBURN: If it was postponed, it would depend on how long the postponement was and whether another one was named. MR. JOHN MINER: If there are four Council members and the tie is 2-2, it doesn't go? MAYOR WOODBURN: That's correct. It has to be a majority. MRS. MONICA TUGGLE, 4126 James Circle: Where does the fire engine come from? Lake Johanna? MAYOR WOODBURN: Rice Street or Lake Johanna. If there is any fire issue, it's not so much getting in as it is getting trapped once they are in. MRS. TUGGLE: Okay, I have a question - did they think of the feasibility of putting a service road along Highway 10 onto old Snelling - a service road alongside 10? MAYOR WOODBURN: Mr. Christoffersen, is there any possi- bility of that? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I wouldn't think there would be a possibility of a service road adjacent to Highway lO on the east side because of the steep terrain. It's very steep in there and it would be very difficult and expensive to build a service road. MAYOR WOODBURN: If it's a service road, it's usually State. Are they building much of anything like this? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I don't think the State would see the need for a service road. MAYOR WOODBURN: I would like, at this time then, to close the public meeting. If there are any new ideas' that haven't been discussed, we would like to listen to them, of course. However, I think that the ,Council has heard a great deal and if there aren't any new ideas we probably won't have another public meeting. . MR. POPOVICH: Mayor~ by that you mean there wi11 be no more public "hearings". MAYOR WOODBURN: I stand well corrected. MR. POPOVICH: I didn't mean to correct you, but with the press here and everything . . MAYOR WOODBURN: All of our meetings are public. The public hearing is closed and we will take any comments from 28 . . . , the Council at this time. Any comments or questions? . COUNCILMAN HOLLENHORST: a couple of meetings ago and the road and in favor of the I made my feelings on this known indicated that I was opposed to cul-de-sac. MAYOR WOODBURN: Do you have any questions or comments on specific things? COUNCILMAN HOLLENHORST: No. MAYOR WOODBURN: COuncilman McAllister? COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: Yes, your Honor. I guess I'd like some clarification. I don't think it's fair to go ahead and approve this when Marcel can't afford the assessments. I think we have some things to straighten out on that. I, too, opposed the road through the park until I began thinking about Grey Fox Road, where it was so obvious to me that we should make that connection. If we make that connection, by the same token I think we should make this connection just from an engineering point of view. Before I vote for a road through Floral Park, I would like to make clear in mind how we intend to pay for it. I'm not sure it's right to put the entire burden on Marcel, who doesn't really care if there's a road through the park or not. I would like to get that worked out. MAYOR WOODBURN: Councilman Johnson, do you have any comments or questions? . COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Yes. Where do I start? I think there are people here that probably feel I've made up my mind and am ready to push the road through, and I'm probably still in favor of the road, but I think you're here tonight to hear why. You deserve to know why some of these things - how we arrive at it. Believe me" it doesn't come easy. I'd like to address a few things here. First of all, I'd like to address some planning history that's gone on in Arden Hills. I think newer residents deserve to know it. I was twelve years on the Planning Commission watching a lot of this planning go through, with many frustrations - primarily the frustration that we weren't making the connections from Hamline to Snelling that we really wanted because of the individual developments. If you were to go back to the state aid maps of 1971, you would find that Floral Road was projected to go through and connect to Snelling. It was a state aid road. If you were to go to 1975 planning maps, you'd find that Floral Road was still in- tended to connect through to Snelling Avenue. If you were to go to the comprehensive plan of 1976 and the state aid map, it was still there. There have been many of you that have lived here long before 1976. Then we came up with a comprehensive plan wherein, under the transportation portion of it, it read, for thoroughfare systems - the City will encourage new develop- ment to provide (inaudible) streets, which are sensitive to 29 . . , . topography and natural features. However, streets must be reasonably continuous and without excessive dead-ends. There was a lot of conversation about cul-de-sacs at that time - from the standpoint of safety. They had many meetings with the fire chief. That's one of the reasons that cul-de-sacs were enlarged. We got new fire equipment and the tankers could not turn around in the conditions that we were planning so we had to enlarge them. After that, we also considered the ordinance that we just read to you. The ordinance tells us that we shall not exceed 500 feet, and yet we're being asked to grant vari- ances and approve planning. It turns right around and defeats what we set up in the ordinance. It doesn't make much sense. We've also visited with our public works people. I asked Bud to come tonight. It's probably a good thing he didn't. He wasn't very happy with the work that they've had to do in the last couple of weeks. We have 46 cul-de-sacs in our City, with- out counting the additional cul-de-sacs now planned in the Royal Hills development. On a cost basis, he will plow approximately one-half to one mile of straight roads for every cul-de-sac he has to plow. Right now he says that if we get another big snow, there are cul-de-sacs where he doesn't even know where he'll put the snow. Nor does he have any assurance that some of these bigger emer- gency vehicles, once they're in, can turn around and get back out., To follow that up, I have met with the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department, since I'm working directly in the public safety area, and have patrolled those streets during these storms during the last two weeks on about three or four nights. We know how they're filling up. I've simply asked the police for their feelings on where we would (inaudible) or what we would do. One answers - you'd probably panic. They definitely - and they can't reinforce it strongly enough - request that we seriously consider through streets for the purposes of ease of patrolling since cul-de-sacs, to them, both from snow and a safety standpoint, are a problem. It's not uncommon to see cul-de-sacs patrolled half the time that through streets are patrolled. From the standpoint of fire, to be very honest, with you, they were not as concerned about the turn-around aspects during the fair weather and during the weather as it is right now, unless it becomes somewhat worse than it is. They're concerned about holding the pumpers at some distance so that they could back up safely. . These are some of the things that we've looked at, from the standpoint of a through street. I've also looked very closely at that intersection of Floral and Hamline., I'm in 100% agreement with those who are concerned about getting out there. I've been out there at 7:00 in the morning, I've sat in the driveway, backed up to Cardiac Pacemaker, and watched those of you try to sneak out. There are some visibility prob- lems. Hamline Avenue has been a headache for us for a long time. As you know, we tried to do something about it some time back, and failed. I think that if we were to proceed 30 . , . . with the road going through, that we have to look at Hamline parallel to this project. Not only from the standpoint of Floral, but also from the standpoint of Colleen. Colleen has its share of problems too. I don't think that I'm ready to make a vote tonight, because I think if I was to vote I would have contingencies on it that probably would hold up the vote. I guess I'd like to be able to look closer at these contingencies before making a decision. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: A contingency - for instance, a right turn lane or something like that? COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Yes. I'm not at all sure that we can't talk to the State about traffic control on Floral and Hamline. We've heard this story on Snelling and Hamline years ago. We've learned some lessons on Hamline and 51. I'm not convinced that we can't accomplish something else. MAYOR WOODBURN: Do you think, within the time frame that we're allowed to approve or disapprove this, that we could accomplish something or find out if any of these changes on Hamline are possible? COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: What's our time frame? ,MAYOR WOODBURN: We're beyond it now, for approval of the preliminary plat. Based on what I see going on, the way property is selling, I don't think that the developer is going to be in too much of a panic to get out there and put signs up. Do you agree? MR. MARCEL EIBENSTEINER: I ,agree. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: I think we have a number of things that should really be looked at parallel with this. I've been frustrated with this development since eight years ago. MAYOR WOODBURN: Mrs. Zehm, what is the time limit that we are required to approve or disapprove this? MRS. ZEHM: It was 60 days, I believe. MAYOR WOODBURN: We're required to act on it after 60 days? MRS. ZEHM: Yes. I can look it up; . COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: While she's doing that, I'll bring up another area here that has to do with the park. I can appreciate the concern of the Park Committee of losing the land and believe me, they're an aggressive bunch. I was just wondering - we may not be able to do so much with the land it- self, but if monies could be someway transferred back to the Park Committee - I heard from the representatives of Colleen earlier that they, in turn, may be helpful in helping with some of the costs. If they have a problem in the assessment rolls 31 . , , .' .. for the particular development at hand, it is possible that they might be interested in helping the Park Committee - some way of reimbursing the park for the loss of its land? That may be a . possibility. MRS. ZEHM: It's 30 days after receipt of the Planning Com- mission report. MAYOR WOODBURN: Although classically, if no objection is forthcoming from the developer, we have taken longer than that. MRS. ZEHM: Right. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: I'd like to ask Don a question, or Marcel, relative to (inaudible). Marcel, you indicated that you obviously want to get rid of some of the storm sewer that runs on Royal Lane. MR. MARCEL EIBENSTEINER: Right. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: That, topography-wise, is about a 20 foot drop? MR. EIBENSTEINER: Twenty .feet from the east side to the intersection. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: I don't know what the percentage would be, but are you of the thinking that you could delete the underground work, let that water run at the curbs down to Norma Avenue? MR. EIBENSTEINER: Right. Down to the intersection. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Have you established or determined what the velocity of the water would be as it leaves the park area and what it would be doing as it reaches Norma Avenue? . MR. EIBENSTEINER: No. All I've done - I've talked t9 an engineer - I didn't tell him who was doing the work here I just showed him what the problem is and aske& if I could eliminate the pipe in the street and have a catch basin at the bottom of the intersection. He said he could figure it out and about a half hour later he said yes, there would be no problem. In fact, he suggested we could even go a hundred feet further. I can understand your concern. Your concern is that the water would be coming down the hill at such a high velocity - so we'd have a catch basin half way between the hill and the intersection and another one at the bottom of the inter- section. I guess I can buy that. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: I guess I'd like to have Don at least comment about that. If I'm way off in left field, tell me, but when I look at a 20 foot drop in that distance, it seems to me that it's going to be a little difficult to pick that water up in a surface-type catch basin. 32 , , " '~' .' . .. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: (Changed Tape) . . . four or five acres of land draining at that point. The rule of thumb is one cubic foot per second per acre. Another ~ule of thumb is two cubic feet per second for the storm sewer. It appears to me that at least half way up the road we would need some storm sewer. At least up to this point right here, for some pick-up, because we have approximately four c.f.s. - two c.f.s. (in- audible). Obviously, for the purpose of the report, we put in the storm sewer - the maximum amount that would be required rather than the minimum amount. Obviously, if later on we find out that we need more storm sewer and we didn't have it in the hearing cost, we'd have to have another hearing. So we put the cost in on top and work away from that if we can. It's my opinion that storm sewers should go at least half way up, if not three-quarters of the way up that hill, to pick up some of that water draining down to the park. We can't solve the drainage of that little low area of the park and recommend that we (inaudible) right into that low area (inaudible) so it doesn't overflow into the street. It's better to pick it up a little bit at a time rather than all at once. MAYOR WOODBURN: Don, would you reaffirm or clarify that the pond level will not be changed, either way, whether the water sheets down the road or whether it has been picked up by storm drainage. MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: If the road grades could be set to where they're below the pond level - I'm not sure whether it would hold water for a great deal of time or not, I'm not that familiar with it - but it shows up on the contour, map as a low, isolated area that holds water, at least during a rain storm. I don't know if it holds' it all the time or not. If the water could be allowed to run across the curb without ponding, then I think we need the storm sewer at least half to three-quarters of the way up the road. However, if there is a pond - if it does hold water - I would say we would be working with the bottom of the current low level - to drain that and keep it at a normal level. If there is water in' there and it stands there the whole year round.- if it's cat-tail, marshy land and the City wishes to keep it as such - I would just recommend keeping it at its normal level, to where it would remain as such. If it's a piece of land that can be filled in and leaves the low level without disturbing the trees or any heavy vegetation, I would say that could also be done without appreciably damaging the property. Either way, I think you could make it work. MAYOR WOODBURN: So it can be developed without any change in vegetation or trees, from what is presently there? MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That's my feeling. I think it may require a storm sewer to the park. MAYOR WOODBURN: But it can be done and that's what we wanted to clarify. To me, it's kind of unfortunate that this has become - this feasibility study has become inexplicably 33 . .. " .. .... . . entwined with' the platting, but it had to in this case, when we're discussing a large amount of platting here as well as the feasibility. With respect to the feasibility, from what I've heard here, it's money. It would seem to me that this study benefits the property that would be platted and perhaps some other lots and, therefore, if it's done in this way, we should be told whether it's feasible or not by the engineer and the developer because the improvements are for the plat and not for anything else. If there is a road to be put through the park, it has to benefit the park. If it thereby becomes un- feasible, then our question here tonight is moot. We should find that out at some meeting - I think that meeting should be very shortly in the future. I agree that we should consider what we've heard here tonight. If we have our minds made up before a public hearing, then there's no use having the public hearing. After considering everything, come back and dispose of the issue one way or the other. 'If this should be - as I've heard expressed - the wish of the Council, we could accomplish that by tabling this until a definite time, at which time we will reconsider the feasibility. Is that the wish of the Council? Or do you wish to proceed at this point? If we pro- ceed at this point, the first necessity would be approving the plat. COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: I have one question for Marcel. What did you say the maximum assessment per lot was that you could live wi th? MR. EIBENSTEINER: I could live with $11,OOO, but to answer the Mayor's comment, I would just as soon table this for this evening and bring it up at the next Council meeting and at that time make a decision. MAYOR WOODBURN: There's been a request by Mr. Eibensteiner for a little more time. What is the Council's wish? Entertain a motion or any further discussion? Councilman McAllister moved that the Council table its action on Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-81-5 (Roya~ Hills Plat) until the Council's next regular meeting on February 8, 1982. Councilman Hollenhorst seconded the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0). 34 " ,;;, 4 ..'t< . . STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk Administrator of the City of Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota, hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a special meeting of the City Council of said City held on the date therein indicated with the original of said minutes on file in my office and that said extract is a full, true and correct transcript of said minutes, insofar as they relate to the proposed construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-81-5 under and pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, as amended. WITNESS MY HAND and the seal of said City this /~a day of February, 1982. 94~~ C~ ty Cler A rator (SEAL)