Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Item No. 1 <br />Staff Report No. <br />Meeting Date: January 2, 2001 <br />Type of Business: W.K. <br />WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; <br />CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report <br />To: Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />From: Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works <br />Item Title/Subject: Discussion of Proposed Street Projects <br />Date of Report: August 29, 2018 <br /> <br />In recent weeks, staff has invited neighborhoods from both proposed street improvement projects <br />(Project 2001-1 Co. Rd. H2 and 2001-2 Ardan, Eastwood, Greenwood and Sunnyside) to <br />informational meetings. Surveys were sent to all identifiable property owners requesting they <br />select the type of improvement of their choice, including No Improvement. Surveys were to be <br />completed and returned within a two-week window. The results of the surveys were mailed to the <br />residents with the announcement of a meeting to discuss the survey and gather comments. Both <br />surveys are attached for Council’s review. <br /> <br />The first of the Projects was 2001-2 of which the majority of the residents on all streets have <br />selected No Improvement as their choice. Residents of Sunnyside comprise the closest margin of <br />No Improvement and a Recycle and Overlay, with 11 and 9 respectively. At the second <br />informational meeting, drainage issues were discussed with a few of the residents in attendance. <br />Those in the low areas of the street expressed a need to correct these problems. Addressing the <br />drainage problems would require the installation of storm sewer on Ardan Ave. Obviously if this <br />contemplated, the street should be reconstructed. A couple of the residents in attendance, while <br />initially voting to do nothing, did state, that if some type of project was to occur, they preferred <br />that it was done right. At this point, I believe there are a number of options to consider. <br /> <br />1). Abide with the survey results returned by the residents in which No Improvement <br /> would be made to any of the streets proposed. <br /> <br /> 2). Proceed with the minimum measure (overlay) on all streets. <br /> <br /> 3). Proceed with the recommended measure of rehabilitation for all streets. <br /> <br />4). Schedule additional meetings to attempt to establish a consensus, that some type <br />of improvement is necessary. <br /> <br />5). Move on to the next scheduled improvement, notifying the residents that no <br />preventative pavement management measures will be taken on these segments of <br />streets and No Improvement will be scheduled, unless the residents petition the <br />City for an improvement, at which time the City will perform the initially <br />recommended project, if the pavement condition warrants it. <br />