Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council August 11, 2014 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br /> <br /> <br />Planning Associate Heller stated at the July 28th Council meeting the Council approved a <br />Developer’s Agreement for Longview Estates. Since that time, Mr. Harstad has requested <br />several changes to the required financial guarantees. She reviewed the various guarantees within <br />the agreement stating Mr. Harstad has agreed to provide the City with $50,000 for the streets and <br />$5,000 for the other guarantee. Staff supported the proposed revisions and recommended the <br />Council approve the revised Developer’s Agreement for Longview Estates. <br /> <br />Council Member Hull asked if the $5,000 guarantee would cover the expense of the developer <br />not completing the grading on the site. Planning Associate Heller explained this was the case <br />and indicated Mr. Harstad had an additional guarantee in the amount of $25,000 with the Rice <br />Creek Watershed to cover all water and drainage issues. <br /> <br />Council Member Mueller questioned if the City would have a developer’s agreement with the <br />builders hired to construct the homes on the Longview Estate lots. Planning Associate Heller <br />stated this had not been the practice of the City. <br /> <br />Mr. Harstad discussed the grading process that has been taking place and stated no holes would <br />be left open. <br /> <br />Mayor Flaherty recommended the site restoration guarantee be increased to $10,000 to cover any <br />unforeseen expenses the City may incur. In addition, he believed that the street restoration <br />guarantee should cover the expense of the entire roadway, curb and gutters being brought back to <br />its current condition with no patches. <br /> <br />Mr. Harstad did not believe that this was a fair standard to hold him to. He discussed an infrared <br />process that was being proposed to remove the scuff marks currently on the roadway. <br /> <br />Mayor Flaherty wanted to be sure that Longview would be brought back to its current condition <br />after this development was completed given the fact the roadway was like new. <br /> <br />Public Works Director DeBar stated it was not the practice of the City for developers to replace <br />an entire block, but noted the roadway was jointed every 30 feet. He believed it would be <br />reasonable for the developer to go from joint to joint if a section was damaged. <br /> <br />Mayor Flaherty asked if Mr. Harstad was willing to agree to the 30 foot section. Mr. Harstad <br />respectfully understood the position of the City but had a hard time understanding why he was <br />being held to a higher standard regarding the replacement of a roadway. He reported that he has <br />paid taxes and assessments to the City of Mounds View for his property. <br /> <br />Council Member Hull asked if a resident with a sewer problem was responsible for replacing the <br />street from joint to joint. Public Works Director DeBar stated the City tried to replace the asphalt <br />from joint to joint and the centerline as much as possible for sewer or watermain repairs, <br />however this depended on where the repair was needed. He explained that the infrared process <br />proposed by Mr. Harstad was an acceptable method of asphalt repair. He believed the Council’s