04-05-83 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY COUNCIL MEETING, APRIL 5, 1983 -11- 11. ENGINEER'S REPORT: D. Sealcoat'P'rram- Bohrer distributed the Sealcoating Feasibility ep Rortwhieh qutlinedsan approach to meet the sealcoating needs of the City. All the City streets were divided into three areas and included in a 6 year program whereby 1/3 of the streets would be sealcoated every other year. Streets would be seal - coated on even numbered years with crack filling done by the maintenance department during odd numbered years. The program would begin in 1986. 1983-64 a''catch-up' program is proposed, then the 6-year program would be initiated. City would have to sell bonds to pay for the program which would then allow the City to directly assess from 20 to 100% of the sealcoating costs. If less than 100% is assessed the difference can be levied to pay for the bonds. The City of Mahtomedi is currently using this method of assessment. --Morgan - suggested working out a method whereby the same percentage of maintenancefundsare applied; as have been in the past, to the yearly project and assess the remaining costs. --Bohrer - a regular sealcoating program will increase the life of a street. M/S/P Morgan/Fraser to table action on the sealcoating Progam for two weeks during which time the City Engineer and City Administrator will prepare a summary sheet of the proposed program and assessment to be sent out with the Feasibility Hearing Notice to affected property owners. Carried 5-0. --Bohrer - informed the Council that the County has indicated they would write a change order to include the City in their 1983 Sealcoat Program but stressed the importance of the Council making a decision on the Feasibility Hearing at their next meeting. E. Water Tower Alarm Bids - Bohrer recommended extending the ETEF letting time and the Council agreed. 12. PZC REPORT: A. Annual Work Plan - Whittaker reviewed the Commissions plan, an urgeAte' Council to turn in any additional items they want included so that they can be scheduled. The Council indicated the plan "looks good". B. One Acre Lots - Zoning - Whittaker explained the rational a:� — of the Commission an considering tedueing the minimum lot size. The general consensus of the Council indicated there was no urgency to consider reducing the minimum lot size to 1 acre. --Eder - what is the ultimate goad - the ultimate development (lot size)from area to area - how would lots be split should sewer and water come in - need to discuss future resubdivision of new plats. C. Reduction in 1 1/2 acre lots - Comp Plan - Whittaker outlined the areas t e Commission deleted that were planned R-1 in the Comp Plan. He explained this action was based on a recommendation from the Met Council. The Council requested that the Commission submit a preliminary proposal for Council review before calling a public hearing.