Agenda - Public Works Committee - 11/20/2001

Home

At the informational meeting, Staff explained that this meeting was to be held to introduce the concept of an improvement project and proposed some alternatives that could comprehensively solve the concerns that have been expressed over the years and identified on the map that presented to the Public Works Committee in June. Staff tried to make it clear that the proposals that were discussed were ultimately a City Council decision and the information provided was for discussion purposes. General Concerns from both neighborhoods · No costs were discussed as we were too early in the conceptual stage to determine an exact amount. · Staff proposed that the City install utilities (sewer, water, and storm sewer) · Cost for installation of utilities to come from respective utility funds with no requirement to hook up. · The intent of this proposal was to recoup the costs associated with the installation of these lines when the water and sewer was hooked up to the individual houses by the collection of sewer and water trunk and lateral fees. This would be done at the residents' option. · The due on sale clause ordinance was explained and we promised to provide a status of that when we sent out a notice of the public hearing. · Staff explained the content of a Feasibility Study that could be written as part of the process for a successful improvement project. · Staff explained that the City was not forcing this project on anyone and that there was an opportunity to counter petition the project and stop it by more than 50% of the residents. · There was concern regarding the development potential of the adjacent land to these developments and general consensus that they did not want to be connected to that development. 151~t Avenue NW, 152nd Avenue NW, and Flourine Street NW · Since there is not any pavement on these streets, Staff proposed that the costs associated with the pavement and concrete curb and gutter be special assessed against the benefiting property owner. · There was concern as it relates to the assessment policy and general consensus that if this project got that far that it be assessed on a front foot basis. · Concern was expressed about drainage coming from the Brandseth Addition to the south. · Concern was expressed about the condition of the streets and that some of them felt that the City should also pay for a portion of the street, curb and gutter costs. Pondvale Estates Since there already is pavement on these streets and the residents of this development have already paid for the initial construction cost with the purchase of their houses, Staff proposed that 50% of the costs associated with the pavement and concrete curb and gutter be special assessed against the benefiting property owner with the remaining 50% to be financed by the City of Ramsey.