HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMin_92Nov25MINUTES ~ ~ ~~~
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 25, 1992
Baldwin convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT
Baldwin, Ciernia, Gehrz, Gibson Talbot and Jacobs. Also present
were Chenoweth, Hoyt and Maurer.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF 10/28/92 AND 11/12/92
Council approved the following minutes by unanimous consent:
1. Regular meeting of October 28, 1992
2. Special meeting of November 12, 1992
ITEM C-2 REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON POLICY AGENDA
Item C-2, Proposed Ordinance Relating to Itinerant Salespersons,
was removed from the Consent Agenda and placed on the Policy
Agenda at Ciernia's request.
CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED
Council approved the following Consent Agenda by unanimous
consent:
1. Disbursements:
a. General disbursements through 11/19/92, $35,642.11
b. Payroll, 11/01/92 - 11/15/92, $10,697.52
2. Adoption of Ordinance 0-92-6 Amending Chapter 5, Part
13 of the City Code Relating to Business Licenses
3. Authorizing the hiring of part-time temporary ice rink
personnel
4. Authorizing purchase of various items of equipment for
the Fire Department at a cost of $20,809.48
5. Licenses: Air Conditioning Associates, #0995, Lion's
Club Tree Sales, #0994 and U of M Forestry Club Tree
Sales, #0996
APPROVAL OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR PROPOSED 1993 IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECS FOR SAME
Baldwin reviewed the procedure followed by council in
establishing policy and scheduling for upgrading the city's
infrastructure. He explained that the object of the criteria
established was to obtain the highest longevity for dollars
spent, make responsible use of street funds and equitable
distribution of costs, and use of MSA funds across the city while
maintaining the city's superior financial rating. Baldwin also
addressed some questions raised by property owners at a recent
informational meeting on the proposed 1993 project.
1.5 ~s
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 25, 1992
PAGE 2
Jim Solem, 1975 Autumn, indicated he did not question the need to
fix the street and address drainage but questioned the
apportionment of cost. He commented on the fact that due to the
design of the area residents in the development to the south use
the streets as much as the abutting property owners and should
share in the cost of any improvements. Mr. Solem also questioned
the placement of recent traffic checks.
Ciernia explained that at the time development to the south was
considered there were two options, multi family housing which
would have required another access either to the south or the
west, or single family homes with the exit to the north as it is
today. Everyone's preference at that time was for single family
homes. Baldwin stressed that use of streets by others than
abutting property owners is the reason why 50~ of the cost is
funded from general taxes.
Peter Olin, 1958 Summer, urged that all options be considered.
He indicated he had checked with a contractor who was of the
opinion that two inches of the road can be milled off and
replaced and paved at a lower cost. He also felt Summer Street
did not need extensive repair and that cuts could be made and
concrete curb installed without tearing up the street.
Maurer indicated that he is familiar with that process, however
had not investigated that possibility at the time of the
informational meeting. He was of the opinion that Summer is in
better condition than the other streets, that more information
will be obtained, and he will be prepared to address this at the
public hearing.
Ray Garcia, 1906 Prior, said he has watched the street
deteriorate for the last ten years, that in front of his property
the entire edge of the black top is broken up all the way to
Roselawn and he felt it would continue to do so. He also
commented on damage of boulevards by the snow plows with the
absence of concrete curbs. Mr. Garcia stated the proposed high
assessment is oppressive but that things would not get cheaper
and he felt the project should not be delayed. He did question
why Roseville assessments are much lower than those proposed for
this project to which Baldwin replied that due to Roseville's
cash flow they can afford to pay 75% of the cost from tax
revenues whereas Falcon Heights currently pays 50%.
Maurer explained that he is presently working with estimates,
these estimates are conservative, and hopefully bids will come in
lower.
1.5 g
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 25, 1992
PAGE 3
Larry Stowe, 1954 Autumn, indicated he has no problem with long
range planning but even though there is a plan it is not
necessary to automatically do it and urged flexibility. Mr.
Stowe presented the following questions/comments: 1) Why is it
necessary, streets are not in imminent danger and could be
repaired, 2) curbs do not aesethically add to the area, 3) no
need to extend storm sewers, 4) estimated assessment is high,
residents have other uses for that money and, 5) Autumn, Prior
and Summer Streets are used as collector streets by those in the
newer development and they should share in the costs. Mr. Stowe
asked that council consider voting down or postponing the project
and that if the decision is to proceed that all efforts be made
to reduce the assessment by eliminating storm sewers and curbing
from the project.
Maurer responded that storm sewers will be readdressed although
he felt they are needed and that curb and gutter may not have an
aesthetic value but there is an engineering value, as it prevents
water from standing by the edge of the road infiltrating and
damaging the road bed, plus making a nice transition from road to
driveway.
Jacobs commented on Mr. Stowe's request for flexibility. He
stressed the fact that there is flexibility in the 5 year plan
and that it had been used when this project was delayed from 1992
to coordinate with the Grove project to save money.
Ray Garcia questioned why storm sewers would be necessary if the
sub-grade is redone and curb and gutter installed. He felt this
should facilitate the run off. Maurer commented on the
relatively flat grades in the area and the fact that the run off
water would have to travel a long distance.
Will Rogers, 1947 Autumn, questioned why this project is more
expensive than the 1991 project and why overhead costs are so
high. Baldwin explained that assessment is based on front
footage and properties in this area have the largest front
footage in the city. Maurer commented on the fact that
construction costs have increased in this two year period.
Maurer reviewed the items covered by the overhead costs and
explained that the estimated 28% overhead costs are actually low
compared to other communities. Mr. Rogers suggested a citizens
committee meet with council to have some input into the proposed
project.
Baldwin explained that council will be reviewing the present
assessment policy which may or may not result in a change.
,-,
MINUTES ' ~
NOVEMBER 25, 1992
PAGE 4
Wes Tennyson, 1935 Summer, stated he had been responsible for the
petition on his street and that 85~ of those indicated opposition
due to cost, concrete curb and gutter which will change the
character of the neighborhood and the fact that they were
already assessed for storm sewer approximately 10 years ago.
They also questioned whether or not the assessment is fair and
equitable because the neighbors to the south will benefit as much
as those in the assessment area. Baldwin indicated the engineer
will prepare a written response to questions brought forth at
this meeting. Maurer stated that some who have been assessed for
storm drainage to the south will not be assessed again.
Judy McCleery, 1918 Autumn, asked who will fund repair of yards,
sprinkler systems and driveways disrupted during construction.
Maurer replied that the construction contract will include aprons
and sodding. The contract will also require avoiding fences and
sprinklers if at all possible, but if necessary they will be
taken out and replaced.
Karen Northrup, 1942 Summer, commented on the unusual usage of
the streets, i.e., use of their streets by trucks during
construction of the homes to the south which added to wear.
Baldwin explained that the action being considered at this
meeting is acceptance of the feasibility but does not commit to
the project or assessment roll. He stressed that there will be
another opportunity to discuss the project, the city is not
committed until a bid is accepted.
Peter Olein asked what chance there was to challenge the
engineering to which Maurer replied there will be a public
hearing in February and plans will be 85~ completed by that time
and that information will be shared with the residents.
Gehrz requested discussion of sidewalk construction in the
University Grove area as it is being considered a part of the
1993 improvement project including the assessment. She
questioned the cost,if criteria would be established to require
replacement such as safety hazards, if individual homeowners
would have the option whether or not to reconstruct and to obtain
separate bids for the sidewalk abutting their property if so
desired. Maurer explained that all sidewalks are in the
feasibility, but it has not been determined which need repair. A
brief discussion ensued regarding the need for consistency and
the convenience of having it all done during the street
construction.
MINUTES 1. ~'j
NOVEMBER 25, 1992
PAGE 5
Staff will work up a plan on the sidewalk issue and will discuss
it with the Grove Homeowners Association.
ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND
ORDERING PLANS AND SPECS FOR PROPOSED 1993 STREET PROJECT
Ciernia moved adoption of Resolution R-92-49 which carried
unanimously.
RESOLUTION R-92-49
A RESOLUTION RECEIVING REPORT, AND ORDERING PREPARATION
OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS IN THE MATTER OF THE 1993 STREET
IMPROVEMENTS
POSSIBLE POLLING PLACE CHANGE FOR PRECINCT 2
Steven D. Petersen, 1730 W. Larpenteur, briefly reviewed his
rationale for requesting that council consider moving the
Precinct 2 polling place from Falcon Heights United Church of
Christ to Falcon Heights Elementary School. Council concurred
that Mr. Petersen's suggestions regarding parking, setting a role
model for children regarding importance of voting, taxpayers have
an investment in the school, and improved handicap accessibility.
Following a brief discussion Gehrz moved that staff be directed
to open discussion with the school district regarding moving the
Precinct 2 polling place to Falcon Heights School. Motion
carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR CONTRIBUTION TO ROSEVILLE AREA SENIOR PROGRAM
DEFERRED
Lynnae LeBarron, Executive Director North Suburban Senior
Council, presented a brief history of the organization and an
overview of the programs provided. She explained that there has
been a decrease in funding from federal, state and county making
it necessary to rely on donations. All cities within the school
district are offered services by the Senior Program and are
therefore being requested to contribute to the funding. Council
questioned the formula on which the amount requested was based,
indicated they were not opposed to some contribution but were not
comfortable with the suggested amount, and requested more
information from the organization regarding costs. The matter
will be discussed further at a future meeting.
MINUTES ~ U
NOVEMBER 25, 1992
PAGE 6
COMMUNITY RELATIONS WORKSHOP WITH U OF M PERSONNEL SCHEDULED FOR
12/02/92
Council briefly discussed scheduling a workshop as requested by
University of Minnesota personnel. The workshop was scheduled
for 7:00 p.m., December 2, 1992.
STAFF TO REVIEW CHARITABLE GAMBLING ORDINANCE
Hoyt explained that recently there have been several inquiries
from organizations interested in applying for charitable gambling
licenses. Council directed staff to talk to neighboring cities
regarding their experience in this area and then to proceed with
review of the ordinance.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING CODE RELATING TO ITINERANT
SALESPERSONS AND SOLICITORS
Council briefly discussed the proposed ordinance which will
somewhat strengthen regulation of these businesses after which
Ciernia moved adoption of Ordinance 0-92-7. Motion carried
unanimously.
ORDINANCE 0-92-7
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5, PART 7 OF THE CITY
CODE RELATING TO ITINERANT SALESPERSONS AND SOLICITORS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:54 p.m.
Tom Baldwin, Mayor
ATTEST:
~ ~
Shirley Chen weth, City Clerk