Agenda - Council - 11/26/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I flat curb woul~t still require that the existing pavement be sawed back for forming, the bituminous pavement patOhed and the lawn restored. This approach would not interfere with the present "sheeting off"'~of rainfall or snow plowing, but would be a difficulf and fairly expensive process. The mismatched pavement patching would not be especially aesthetically pleasing. The net effect upon appearartce would be negative. (c) The perimeter of existing bituminous paving totals approximately 390 linear feet. Retrofit of curb to existing pavement costs more than twice the amount of new curb construction, because of pavement sawil~g, sod excavation, pavement and soil removal, pavement patching and grass restoratmn. A.~cordzngly, the cost of this project would be approximately $6,500 to $7,000. The undersigned p~ceives no business benefit whatsoever fi-om this expenditure at this time. Thus, from a busines~ viewpoint, the rate of return is zero, and the amortization period is infinite. However, curbing could be added for much less when the existing pavement requires replacement. Please be advised that the undersigned has no objection to improving the aesthetics of our business commOnity as suggested by Reference (A). Indeed, we would agree that neighborhood appearance'afl, ts ~ property values and reflects upon other measures of our business success. However, the a'¢dition of concrete curbing is the instant situation provides no functional improvement, and at best, a minimal improvement in appearance. While the City's desire to "more aggressively seek site improvements to improve the aesthetics of our business community" is commendabl¢~ we recommend that curbing retrofit to otherwise acceptable properties is a final - rather than ini~tial - step. Within a short distance of subject property, one may observe knee high uncut grasl and weeds, sand driveways and parking areas, unlawful signs, an XXX business, badly maintaine~ properties and other eyesores. We recommend that the city "more aggressively seek site impro{~ements to improve the aesthetics of our business community" where such obvious code violations ~xist, while granting reasonable extensions to costly improvements which would produce little or;no change. Alternately, ifth~ city perceives a real value to the public in retrofitting concrete curb on subject property at this time, we would recommend the use of public funds. We are willing to work with the city on this basis. Please feel free to contact the undersigned if questions on the foregoing should arise. I I I Thanking you in advance, William C. Dubats President, Lakeview Development Inc of Minnesota Ramsey Curb Retrofit P. 2 of 2.