Minutes - Council - 10/26/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Case ~6: Proposed Purchase of Lot 3, Block 5, Beaudry's 2nd Addition Projeet~ Manager Gromberg stated that earlier this year, City Council approved a Commuflity Development Block Grant (CDBG) project which consisted of allocating approxima~ rely $17,900 to the Anoka County Community Action Program (ACCAP). The stipulation associated with the allocation was that ACCAP would use the funds to purchase a lot in the City of Ramsey. ACCAP would then construct a home on the lot for which a moderateineome family would qualify for a home mortgage. The selected parcel on which the home was proposed was Lot 6, Block 2, Gorham's Sandy Acres. Mr. Gromberg stated that Council had expressed concerns about drainage on the lot in Gorham's. Therefore, City Staff is recommending the sale of Lot 3, Block 5, Beaudry's 2nd Addition instead.' Couneilraember Zimmerman inquired why this particular lot did not sell and wondered if the landis too low. Motion by Councilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Hardin to adopt ResolutiOn #93-10-259 authorizing the purchase of Lot 3, Block 5, Beaudry's 2nd Addition for $8,807.55. Motion carded. Voting Yes: Mayor Gilbertson, Councilmembers Peterson, Hardin and Beyer. Voting No: Councilmember Zimmerman. Motion by C°uncilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Hardin to schedule the publico! hearing for November 9, 1993, for proposed sale of Lot 3, Block 5, Beaudry's 2nd Addition to Anoka County Community Action Program (ACCAP). Motion carded. Voting Yes: Mayor Gilbertson, Councilmembers Peterson, Hardin and Beyer. Voting No: Councilmember Zimmerman. Case gT: Report on Workmanship on Street Sealcoating Projects City Engineer Jankowski stated that the public improvement assessment hearings were held at the last City Council meeting. There were several complaints voiced and Council had directed Mr. Sankowsld to review the projects and report his findings back to Council. He stated that a big complaint was that the sweeping was not done in a timely fashion and when it Was done, it was done incompletely. He found that the sweeping was delayed by two to two and one-half weeks. With regard to aggregate on lawns, he didn't find any and felt that the sweeping done by the contractor was acceptable. He suggested increasing the amount or, time allowed for sweeping the pea rock from two weeks to three weeks and specify a monetary penalty for failure to meet the deadline. He is also recommending changing ;~e aggregate chip from pea gravel to a fractured chip having less tendency to roll and be peeled from the surface. Complaints were also received regarding areas where the pavement was not sealed; he found that to be acceptable. With regard to holes and cracks, he did find-~one hole and stated that cracks smaller than one-fourth have to be routed out and made bigger. The alternative would be to overlay but listed the disadvantages of that such as increa$od cost. He recommended considering adopting a policy ensuring property owners that assessed maintenance activity be made no more frequently than five-year intervals.: He stated that the City has not reassessed any one more frequently than five years. Councilmember Hardin inquired if Mr. Jankowski felt the job performed was less adequate than in past years to which Mr. Sankowski felt it was about the same. City Council/October 26, 1993 Page 7 of 9