Agenda Packets - 2007/03/12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council February 12, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 5 Council Member Stigney indicated he would not have any issue with that if it meets the City 1 Code requirements. 2 3 Mayor Marty noted that any further subdivision would require a major subdivision process. 4 5 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 6 7 City Administrator Ulrich indicated that there are extra copies of the Resolution for those that are 8 interested. 9 10 D. Resolution 7018, Approving the Sufficiency of Petition in Opposition to the 11 2007-2008 Street and Utility Improvement Project 12 13 City Administrator Ulrich indicated that the Petition as presented appears to be sufficient to meet 14 the requirements in opposition to the project. The petition was received February 9, 2007 and 15 signatures were validated by Staff. He then said that the project consists of 328 properties and, 16 for a successful petition that 165 properties sign the petition. Staff has compared the signatures 17 to property owner lists from Ramsey County and any duplicates were removed. 18 19 City Administrator Ulrich explained that Staff was able to verify that 169 of the 212 signatures 20 are valid and represent individual property owner interests. He then explained that since receipt 21 of the petition, there have been three names withdrawn bringing the total to 166 making this a 22 valid petition. 23 24 City Administrator Ulrich indicated that there are three signatures that do not show up on the 25 property records list so these may have been properties that have changed hands within the last 26 30 days. He then said that there was one objection sent via facsimile and, since it was not in 27 petition format and did not reference the street improvement project number, it was rejected. 28 29 City Administrator Ulrich indicated that the Resolution before Council would approve the 30 sufficiency of the petition in opposition meaning that the City could not take a vote on the same 31 project within one year from the public hearing on the improvement project. He further clarified 32 that this petition would mean that construction would not occur in the year 2007 and it is 33 recommended that this matter be discussed at a work session. 34 35 Tom Kosel of 8120 Jackson Drive indicated that he would be opposed to any improvement 36 project on their streets because the streets are beyond repair. He then said that the streets need 37 renovation and renewal. He further said that there may have been misleading information that 38 came out about this project because the individuals who were canvassing the neighborhood left 39 some material with residents but no where did it state that signing the petition would totally stop 40 the project. The printed information states please sign the petition if you are concerned about 41 construction of curbs or concrete barriers and mailbox groupings, landscape in the boulevard, 42 lack of information, or cannot or do not want to pay for the changes to the streets. It does not 43 state that signing the petition will stop the project. 44 45