Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION June 3, 2013 <br />DRAFT <br /> 2 <br /> 46 <br />Community Development Director Grochala added that while these projects are not a part 47 <br />of the City’s Storm Water Maintenance Program (SWMT), the improvements do impact 48 <br />the outlook of the whole system. The ditch system (including some underground pipes) is 49 <br />a consideration in development planning (e.g. ponding requirements to retain water). 50 <br /> 51 <br />The mayor asked if the ditches can be made bi gger for future use. Mr. Kolb responded 52 <br />that they can be enlarged to some extent under the definition of maintenance but that will 53 <br />be less and less so in the future. 54 <br /> 55 <br />Council Member Roeser stated that he supports the proactive approach. He asked if 56 <br />pro ject financing is pay -as -you -go and Mr. Belfori explained that the RCWD board 57 <br />normally decides on a financing plan and typically bonds are involved with debt service 58 <br />through the charges that have been discussed. Council Member Roeser suggested that 59 <br />State of Minnesota Legacy funding should be a possible funding source and the 60 <br />representatives both explained that Legacy funding is sometimes sought but somewhat 61 <br />difficult to obtain for drainage projects. 62 <br /> 63 <br />When Council Member O’Donnell asked if the council is being asked to authorize the 64 <br />taxation, Mr. Kolb explained that the RCWD ha s that authority; the request to the council 65 <br />is that the council concur with the plan to finance ad valorum and through RCWD. 66 <br /> 67 <br />The mayor suggested that he’d like to get more inform ation on the fu nding before the 68 <br />council votes . When the mayor asked about oversight of the project, Mr. Kolb explained 69 <br />that the RCWD Board is the oversight authority. The council c oncurred that they will 70 <br />receive additional information at a future w ork se ssion, except that Project 53 -62 can be 71 <br />sent forward since it is the most time sensitive, with the understanding that it could be 72 <br />pulled from the council agenda if need be. 73 <br /> 74 <br />2. 74 th Avenue Street Improvements (from Open Mike) - City Engineer Wedel 75 <br />expl ained that the City plans a mill and overlay project in 2013 for Marvy Street and Jon 76 <br />Street. A resident of the area whose property borders on nearby 74 th Street has 77 <br />approached the city about including that street (currently gravel) as a paving project. 78 <br />Staff has sent a letter to the four property owners who front on 74 th Street asking about 79 <br />paving of the street. Two responded favorably, one against and one did not respond. Mr. 80 <br />Wedel presented options for consideration: assessment of 100% of the cost to property 81 <br />owners (petition required ); partial assessment of property owners and c ity covering the 82 <br />rest; city paying 100% of costs; or completion of the paving under MN Statute 419. He 83 <br />added that, with one resident not interested, the full assessment to the property probably 84 <br />isn’t possible. Cost sharing would probably require compliance with the City Charter. 85 <br />Full payment by the city would set a prec edent that would be difficult. When asked for 86 <br />an estimate of the cost, Mr. Wedel responded that around $25,000 to $30,000 would be 87 <br />his estimate of just paving the street and other improvements. 88 <br /> 89