My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2006/06/12
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
Agenda Packets - 2006/06/12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:48:29 PM
Creation date
7/18/2018 4:40:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
6/12/2006
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
6/12/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
187
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council May 22, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 14 <br /> <br />F. Resolution 6823 Authorizing the Preparation of a Feasibility Report and 1 <br />Consultant Selection for the 2007-2008 Street and Utility Improvement 2 <br />Project 3 <br /> 4 <br />Director of Public Works Lee reviewed that at the last work session, staff presented results from 5 <br />the survey asking if residents would support a street and utility improvement program. It was 6 <br />sent to six neighbor project areas. The purpose of the survey was to afford property owners to be 7 <br />heard prior to the City Council selecting three areas for a feasibility report. The City received 8 <br />218 surveys out of 687 properties, or a 31% response rate. Based on the low response rate, the 9 <br />City Council had indicated it was not comfortable moving forward to select the three project 10 <br />areas and wanted to afford residents to be heard. So a second survey was sent out on May 3 with 11 <br />a deadline of May 16. The City received an additional 97 responses or a 46% response rate. 12 <br />Director of Public Works Lee stated a summary of the survey results has been provided in the 13 <br />staff report. 14 <br /> 15 <br />Public Works Director Lee described the boundaries for each of Project Areas A-F and advised 16 <br />staff recommends that Project Areas D and F not be considered for a feasibility report. Staff 17 <br />recommends the Council consider Project Areas A, B, C and E. Staff also recommends if 18 <br />selecting Project Areas B or E, that they be selected together because both are in the northwest 19 <br />area of the City where there are traffic pattern issues that need to be studied as part of the 20 <br />feasibility report. Also, the City would have a probability of getting more favorable bids. Public 21 <br />Works Director Lee presented the following options: 22 <br /> 23 <br />Option 1: Project Areas A, B, and E 24 <br />Option 2: Project Areas C, B, and E 25 <br />Option 3: Other combinations. 26 <br /> 27 <br />Public Works Director Lee presented the schedule for the 2007-2008 Street and Utility 28 <br />Improvement Project indicates that the draft feasibility report will be completed in November 29 <br />2006, the public hearing on December 11, 2006, and construction starting in July 2007. He 30 <br />explained that authorizing a feasibility report at this time will allow staff to conduct a 31 <br />neighborhood meeting in early June with impacted property owners and allow the project to 32 <br />proceed under the current schedule. 33 <br /> 34 <br />Mayor Marty stated his concern with coupling in Option 1 and pointed out that Project Area A is 35 <br />in the northern section of town, which is the area that needs the sound wall. He stated if 36 <br />construction is started on a sound wall, there will be the same concerns in the 2004 and 2005 37 <br />street reconstruction project about trucks and equipment coming in and using the new street. He 38 <br />explained that because water lines are being installed under Highway 10, he was thinking about 39 <br />Option 2 with Project Areas C, B, and E. He stated this is his eighth year on the Council and 40 <br />during that time there has only been one project completed so he thinks it is time to move 41 <br />forward with a project. Mayor Marty noted that everyone will not be happy but this can no 42 <br />longer be put off. He stated during the EDA meeting and TIF discussion, it was mentioned there 43 <br />was a window of opportunity to use some of the TIF pool on infrastructure. 44 <br /> 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.