Loading...
1975-04-29 Council minutesPage 515 April 29, 1975 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Special Meeting Held Tuesday, April 29, 1975 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the special meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights was held at 8:00 o'clock P.M. at the City Hall, 750 South Plaza Drive, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. Mayor Huber called the meeting to order at 8:00 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Mayor Huber, Councilmen Gutzmer, Losleben and Wahl. Councilman Lockwood had notified the Council that he would not be present. HEARING -- Mayor Huber opened the meeting for the purpose of a CIPMENT/VANDALL feasibility hearing on proposed street, curb and gutter and AREA IMPROVEMENTS storm sewer improvements to serve the Clement/Vandall area. Mayor Huber pointed out that the proposed project was initiated by the Council rather than by petition. Mayor Huber turned the meeting over to the City Administrator for a presentation of the proposed project. Administrator Johnson stated that hearing notices had been published in the Sun Newspaper on April 16 and 23, and copies of the notice had been sent to the affected property owners. The City officials have proposed street, curb and gutter and storm sewer improvements in the area north of Wentworth Avenue, south of Emerson, west of Dodd Road, with Clement being the west edge. He stated that this project was initiated after Close scrutiny of maintenance costs on streets. The Council considered such factors as high maintenance costs and poor condition of the streets in the area, the addition of several new homes which would contribute to traffic volume and greater water runoff; poor drainage conditions and lack of natural ponding; access to Wentworth Park, and the necessity of an east/west neighborhood collector street. Mr. Johnson outlined a street maintenance cost analysis compiled in 1972 and an analysis of street conditions throughout the City, which report was compiled in 1974 and updated in 1975. He outlined the proposed construction details, including the streets included in the project and their proposed widths. He stated that the estimated cost for the dead-end streets, proposed to be 18 to 22 feet wide, would be $10.00 per front foot. The estimated cost for construction of the 30 and 36 foot wide streets would be $22.00 to $23.00 per front foot. Total estimated cost of street construction is $275,000; the estimated - cost of piping is $75,000, or $0.06 per square foot within the assessment district; ponding and ditch improvements would cost an estimated $35,000 (not including right-of-way or acquisition costs). He explained past assessment practices and stated that if the project is ordered in and constructed the assessment hearing would probably be held in the summer of 1976. Mayor Huber asked for comments and questions from the audience. He stated that everyone in the audience will be given an opportunity to be heard and that when there are no further Page 516 April 29, 1975 questions, the hearing will be closed. At the close of the hearing, anyone who wishes may leave his name and objection with the City Clerk and that written comments and objections will be accepted at the City offices. Stanley Uggen, 1415 Dodd Road asked how the proposed width on First Avenue relates to the present width. Norman Roth, 660 Second Avenue, asked why no provision has been made for the unplatted area west of Clement, between Clement and Fourth Avenue. Wayne Nelson, 1389 Clement, asked why 36-foot streets are necessary. Fred Metcalfe, 1355 Clement, asked why curb and gutters and storm sewers are proposed since the Cherry Hills Addition does not have curb and gutters nor does the Ivy Falls area. Bob Burow, 654 First Avenue, stated that he feels storm sewers are legitimate but that he likes the rural atmosphere of the area and would object to curb and gutters for that reason. Jack Rolig, 679 Third Avenue, stated that a petition signed by most of the residents of the area has been submitted to the City and that these residents object to the improvements for the following reasons: speed will increase with better street surfacing; an unfenced ponding area wi 11 be a hazard to area children; the residents oppose the proposed neighborhood collector street, curb and gutters and storm sewer. Jerry Logan, 724 First Avenue, asked if any consideration has been given to just improving the streets without widening them or installing curb and gutters. Ronald Heuer, 656 Second Avenue, stated that he has circulated a petition against the project and there are 80 signatures on the petition. Mrs. James Diebel, 666 Third Avenue, asked why some of the other streets in the City are not being considered for improvement rather than the Clement/Vandall area, since the maintenance costs for other streets are higher than the costs for maintenance in the Clement/Vandall area. Mrs. Jerome Ferodowill, 659 Second Avenue stated that the Somerset View area improvements did not include curb and gutters and that she feel the proposal for curb and gutters in -the Clement/Vandall area is ridiculous. Mr. Ken Piotroschke, 644 First Avenue, stated that if the proposedneighborhood collector street is constructed, the street assessment should be paid in part by the residents of Cherry Hills since they will also benefit by such improvement. Page 517 April 29, 1975 Frank Thera III, 1397 Clement Avenue, asked what effect the • development of the Riley/Bancroft area would have on these proposed improvements. William Johnson, 660 Second Avenue, asked if Federal Revenue Sharing funds could be used to defray part of the costs of the proposed improvements. Fred Metcalfe, 1355 Clement, asked if the project would still be ordered in if 90% of the area residents are opposed to it. Kelly Strebig, 1421 Clement, asked if there will be any underground NSP or telephone lines installed in connection with the proposed improvements. William Steinke, 690 Second Avenue, objected to curb and gutters and storm sewer facilities, suggesting that a lip be constructed along the streets or that culverts be used fOr drainage. Ray Burows, 668 First Avenue, stated that many of the homes on First Avenue are close to the road now and that widening the street from the present 22 feet would really reduce some of the front yards. He objected to the project, asking that the proposed street widths be reduced and that curb and gutters and storm sewer be deleted from the proposal. Jack Heschler, attorney for Somerset 19, outlined the property recently purchased by the residents of Somerset 19 and stated that the reasoning for purchasing the property was to try to keep the area as open space. John Kalaus, 1394 Clement, objected to the improvements, stating that he is still paying for water and sewer assessments for his property. H e suggested that the street width be kept to a minimum of thirty feet. Philip Schneider, 655 Third Avenue, stated that he does not feel Third Avenue needs to be widened or improved, but that the holes should be filled and the dust should be kept down. Alfred Wiik, 685 Third Avenue, objected to the proposed street width of 36 feet and the curb and gutter and storm sewer proposal. Mrs. Jerome Ferodowill asked whether a petition from the residents requesting 22 foot streets would be considered by the Council. Jack Rolig asked why 30 and 36 foot streets are necessary when the streets recently constructed in the Somerset View area are only 22 feet wide. Lee Smith, 717 Third Avenue wondered whether the proposed improvements would force the Somerset 19 people into selling their recently acquired property. He also asked that some provision be made for protection around the proposed ponding area. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 ADJOURN Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 ATTEST: Page 518 April 29, 1975 Mrs. Herman Mundt, 1490 Somerset Court, objected to the proposed improvements as being unnecessary: Gregory Quehl, 691 Third, asked when the work would be done if the project is ordered in. Mrs. Linda Smith, 717 Third, objected to any street improvements because of the possibility of inbreased traffic through the area. Mayor Huber thanked the residents for their comments and asked that anyone with objections to the project submit letters to the City offices or leave their names, addresses and objections with the City Clerk. Mayor Huber moved that the hearing be closed. Councilman Losleben seconded the motion. The hearing was closed at 9:55 o'clock P.M. There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Huber moved that the meeting be adjourned. Councilman Gutzmer seconded the motion. Time of Adjournment: 10:01 o'clock P.M. Donald L. Huber Mayor 4111, --..00/ ALIAILidli .40,---NTabaugh erk- easurer