07-28-1997 CC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

411 Page S LiN , July 14, 1997 , A, PROVED Mounds View City Council 1 2 COUNCIL BUSINESS: 3 4 A. Consideration of Resolution No.5142,Authorizing a Feasibility Study for the Reconstruction of 5 Spring Lake Road and County Road L 6 7 Mr.Ulrich provided a brief history of the project. He explained that the city did receive a petition signed by a 8 number of people stating that they do not want the road any wider than it currently is and only wish to have it 9 re-surfaced. He informed them that he could not make that recommendation to the Council. 10 He noted that the City has received a proposal from SEH for a feasibility study which would answer a number 11 of questions, put together a mock assessment roll and explain why certain design standards would be 12 recommend. This would be presented at the next informational meeting with the residents on August 19, 1997. 13 14 15 Mayor McCarty stated his concern is that everyone affected be notified of the proposed improvements. 16 17 Council member Trude suggested that an information summary be put together and delivered to the homes. 18 She feels it is very important to have open communication between the residents and the city staff. 19 5 20 Barb Haake,3024 County Road I,asked how a road is turned back from Ramsey County,is it requested by the 21 city? Mr.Ulrich provided an explanation of the process,noting that the turn back roads are rated to determine 22 the amount of reconstruction funds they must provide the city with in order to bring it up to standards. The 23 County's other option is to reconstruct the road prior to turning it back to the city. 24 25 Ms.Haake stated the residents were told that MSA funds would likely be available to help reduce some of the 26 costs. Mr.Ulrich explained how the MSA funds work,noting that these funds pay for the actual project,but 27 that the assessments that come in for the next ten years may then be used to fund other projects in the city to 28 provide cash flow and also maintenance needs on the streets to lessen the burden for remaining road 29 construction. 30 31 Ms.Haake noted that she,along with some other residents,own six inches of property under the actual road 32 and there is not right-of-way at all on a portion of County Road I. In regard to drainage,she stated that those 33 in the Watershed District will be closely watching the drainage of Spring Lake Road,as they would like to see 34 some areas in which the water could be held and purified before it goes into Spring Lake. 35 36 Charles Young,3032 County Road I, stated he owns two lots and when the sewer was put it,the city stopped 37 the line between the two of them. He has been told that he gets water and sewer from Fridley on Lot 56,so he 38 wondered why Mounds View would run the water line over the lot that Fridley services. Mr.Ulrich explained 39 that properties on Pleasant view between County Road I and Bronson are served by the City of Fridley, 40 including Mr. Young's lot#56. However,his home is served by Lot 55,where sewer service is provided by 41 Mounds View(he does not have city water). 42 43 Mr.Young also explained that he got taxed for half of a 66 foot roadway on County Road I. He has a 44 blueprint showing this,and he is wondering why the road is going to be widened if this is the case. Mr. 1110 45 Ulrich admitted that there are some extreme right-of-way problems in the area. The County has a 66 foot right- 46 of-way,but the road is only 24 feet wide. The road does at least border the resident's property,and possible 47 infringes on it. Mayor McCarty stated the city would take Mr. Young's concerns into consideration and will 48 take appropriate action.