2011_1017_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Roseville, MN - Official Website Page 17 of 31 Ms. Bloom responded that sanitary sewer and a water main were located there from Hamline to Lexington Avenues. Councilmember Johnson noted that individuals had brought up the inability to see approaching traffic from County Road C -2 from both the north and south on Lexington; and questioned if it was fair to assume that a traffic light could be considered for that intersection. Ms. Bloom responded that a number of safety issues had been brought forward from this most recent study, and that staff was attempting to address them. Ms. Bloom advised that, regardless of the City Council's decision on County Road C -2, those sight line issues would be reviewed. Ms. Bloom noted that some would be simple, such as clearing trees, or considering a right turn lane; while others may be more complex, such as grading of the hill looking north at County Rood C -2 and Lexington. Ms. Bloom advised that staff would determine if there was something physical that could be done before considering a signal, in an effort to be cost - effective. In considering whether the situation could be resolved by installing a signal, Ms. Bloom responded affirmatively; however, she cautioned that she didn't think the county would support a stop sign at that location. Councilmember Johnson questioned the existence of an agreement with Lexington Apartments and contingencies that County Road C -2 couldn't be opened up. Ms. Bloom advised that, upon hearing this statement brought forward at a previous meeting when the Pulte application had first come forward, she had personally researched such a document;, as well as wanting to ensure that all past City Council actions were in staff's, the public's and current City Cou nci I's possession. Ms. Bloom advised that her research had found nothing in writing or in the meeting minute records of any such document or contingency with Lexington Apartments to keep County Road C -2 closed. Ms. Bloom noted the existence of a 1988 memorandum when Lexington Apartments was first proposed, that County Road C -2 was intended for construction; however, based on significant opposition at that time, the plan was changed accordingly, and a subsequent failed action at a City Council meeting to vacate County Road C -2 on a 3/2 vote. Mayor Roe questioned liability concerns related to road configuration and standard 30 mph construction; and the City's exposure to such liability. City Attorney Mark Gaughan advised that City Attorney Caroline Beckman-Bell had previously submitted via e-mail to the City Council an actual opinion on how discretionary immunity may be invoked in this type of hypothetical situation; and the opinion that there would be no City liability for any accidents that may result from opening this area. Mayor Roe sought clarification of liability even if a road was not built up to certain standards. City Attorney Gaughan advised that it was at the discretion of the City Council where to build roads; and that the City's intent was not to intentionally hurt people. Related to assessment questions and fairness to property owners, Ms. Bloom advised that the City Council had changed their Assessment Policy in 1991. Prior to that time, Ms. Bloom noted that residents on state aid roads were not assessed. However, Ms. Bloom advised that the policy had changed in 1991 to a blanket 25% assessment for all streets no matter their zoning designation. Ms. Bloom advised that it was staff's charge to cite current City Policy, which was currently at 25% for any road. http:// www. cityofroseville .com /Archive.aspx ?AMID= &Type= &ADID= 1148 &PREVIE... 10/12/2011