Agenda - Council - 01/23/2018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mayor Strommen referenced the resident comment and asked the rating of the roadway mentioned. City Engineer Westby replied that the rating is a four, noting the year of construction and the one sealcoat that took place. He reviewed the preferred schedule of maintenance. Councilmember LeTourneau asked for additional input on how a resident can appeal or the other options a resident may have that objects a project. City Engineer Westby stated that the City Charter allows residents to petition against a Council initiated project, if they are able to gather signatures from 60 percent of the impacted properties. He stated that if that is completed, the petition could be presented to the Council/City Administrator and would cancel the project for up to a period of one year or more. He stated that the street has a rating of four and therefore pushing the overlay off for a period of several years could result in the City having to reconstruct the roadway rather than complete an overlay, which would have a much heavier cost. Mayor Strommen stated that the City is attempting to complete necessary maintenance to protect roads from having to be reconstructed. City Engineer Westby noted that a petition would need to be submitted within 60 days of the closing of this public hearing. Motion by Councilmember LeTourneau. seconded by Councilmember Riley, to Adopt Resolution #18-012 Accepting Feasibility Report and Ordering Plans and Specifications for Improvement Project #18-03, 2018 Street Overlay Improvements. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Strommen, Councilmembers LeTourneau, Riley, Johns, Kuzma, and Shryock. Voting No: None. 6.02: Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of Resolution #18-010 Adopting the City of Ramsey's 2018-2027 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Presentation Finance Director Lund reviewed the staff report and recommendation to adopt the 2018-2027 Capital Improvement Plan, noting that this is a forecasting tool and not actual, committed projects and expenditures. Councilmember Riley stated that it is daunting to look at the CIP as a whole. He noted that it is easy to focus on some of the larger amounts, which focus on infrastructure or desires/needs for the future. He explained that some of the identified needs for the future have funding that is not yet available and therefore these elements are just an outline and there is not an obligation financially. He stated that this has been discussed at length, with justification from department heads on equipment replacement. He believed that the Council and staff have done a great job with this tool for the future. City Council / January 9, 2018 Page 5 of 12