05/09/2005 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 9, 2005 APPROVED 036 it could be done without a referendum. She asked if there were any funds available from the DNR or 137 other sources, considering the situation with the lake. 138 139 Community Development Director Grochala stated since they will not know if the project will move 140 forward until after the November elections, he believes the timing would be to do plans and 141 specifications in 2006 and the actual construction in 2007. He indicated he believes it would be in the 142 best interest of the residents to have the street done in 2007. He stated sewer and water is still an 143 unknown, and part of the feasibility study, and there is still the question of benefit to the property 144 owners from the street improvements. He noted there are no DNR or other funding sources available, 145 to his knowledge. 146 147 Councilmember Carlson asked about the cost of the road with sewer and water, and if there were any 148 estimates for the percentage of assessment of the total cost. She also asked that Staff provide the 149 Council with the number of properties included in the Shenandoah area street improvement project. 150 151 Community Development Director Grochala stated he does not have a cost estimate; that is what the 152 feasibility study will provide. He indicated the percentage of assessment cannot be determined 153 without knowing the cost and benefit to the property owners, and the calculation could change based 154 on the approval of the Pavement Management Program. 155 156 Councilmember Dahl asked if the costs of the initial study would be included in the total amount when it goes to the voters, and if any decisions have been made on how to handle the tree farm. She 111M58 also questioned who pays for the park frontage. 159 160 Community Development Director Grochala advised that any dollars expended would be included in 161 the estimated project cost. He stated how to handle the tree farm would be determined in the 162 feasibility study, noting that property is different than the others in this area. He indicated the park 163 frontage would be the City's responsibility. 164 165 Councilmember Reinert reviewed the City's process for street improvements, noting it is not up to the 166 City Council, it is up to the voters. He stated the voters need information from the feasibility study to 167 make that decision, and he asked the City Council to respect the request from the West Shadow Lake 168 Drive residents and be responsible by ordering the feasibility study. 169 170 Councilmember Stoltz opened the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. 171 172 Kim Fosse, 6900 West Shadow Lake Drive, asked why the Council would approve the Shenandoah 173 feasibility study and now the West Shadow Lake Drive study, and why the City paid an engineering 174 company to identify road improvement needs in 1995, and ten years later they are still ignoring that 175 recommendation. She commented that this is a unique street that benefits many residents providing 176 pedestrian access. She noted the residents of this street also are concerned about fire protection, 177 realizing how vulnerable they are after a fire recently in the area. 178 .79 Charles Buskis, West Shadow Lake, indicated he supports the comments of Councilmember Reinert 180 and Councilmember Stoltz and the need for a new feasibility study that will provide new information 4