10/13/2003 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 13, 2003 APPROVED S184 Resolution No. 03-173 can be found in the City Clerk's office. 185 186 B. 21st Avenue Street and Storm Sewer Improvements, Jim Studenski 187 188 i. Public Hearing, Consideration of Resolution No. 03-174, Adopting Proposed 189 Assessments 190 191 City Engineer Studenski summarized the Staff report, indicating the costs are proposed to be 100% 192 assessed to the property owners. He demonstrated the project area, noting the project would 193 reconstruct the street to Main Street. He stated the street will be widened and portions will receive 194 curb and gutter, with the northern portion remaining rural. He indicated it is anticipated that the 195 northern portion will be improved as part of the Anoka County project being studied for 196 consideration in the next few years. He noted the project has been downsized, with some ponding re - 197 routed to tie into existing ponds in Centerville. He indicated Centerville had a public hearing on the 198 project last week and approved it. 199 200 City Engineer Studenski indicated that as of today Staff has heard more concern about how the 201 assessments would be handled and the scope of the project than about the assessment amounts 202 themselves. He reiterated they have downsized the project to address the concerns, and noted there 203 are time constraints on awarding the bid. It is Staff's recommendation that the Council open the 204 public hearing. 205 41) 206 Mayor Bergeson indicated they did receive written objections to the assessment. City Attorney 207 Hawkins offered that for tonight's hearing the written objections have no impact. He explained that 208 Section 429 says that if a citizen wants to appeal after the hearing they must state those intentions 209 before the hearing, so the written objections received are only protecting those rights. 210 211 Mayor Bergeson opened the public hearing. 212 213 Brian Bourassa, representing Gerald Rehbein asked for two clarifications. He stated in the original 214 development agreement it was Mr. Rehbein's understanding the street was being constructed to City 215 standards for the base, and the City would come back and put on the fmal layer. He indicated the 216 reason Mr. Rehbein thought that is due to the Developer's Agreement Item #6. He indicated it is Mr. 217 Rehbein's understanding he did construct the road to City standards, and is questioning if any of that 218 work can be salvaged. 219 220 City Engineer Studenski indicated some could be salvaged. He stated when they put the final plans 221 together they will try to salvage what they can, however some parts are degraded, so they put in 222 contingencies in case they find something they did not anticipate. He indicated the City has the 223 ability to reduce the costs if work is not needed. 224 225 Mr. Bourassa asked what took so long before the project was considered after the feasibility report. 226 He noted originally this project was to take place in October of 2001. He asked if part of the 227 deterioration was because of the delays. 028