Agenda - Public Works Committee - 11/16/2021

Home

City process that would include visual inspection of the land. She asked whose responsibility it would be to ensure the intent of the sound wall is provided. She stated that she is concerned that this will result in a way that makes them want to move from the cul-de-sac. Mr. Bailey stated that his email included a drawing showing the noise wall extension going further than it does extend. Chairperson Riley asked if the error was on the City or developer. He asked if the recourse against the developer has been lost. City Engineer Westby commented that he can see what was communicated with the residents and agreed that does not align with the plan. He stated that what was built did align with the approved plan. He stated that the last 18 months have been a difficult situation to operate in with numerous people working remotely, acknowledging that communication has lacked and there has been change in staff members that perhaps broke down the process. He stated that moving forward, staff needs to be clear with the residents and developers as to what a wall of this manner would be. He stated that it was never stated in resolution or agreement that the wall would be from the southwest corner of the plat to the northwest corner, that the wall would be six feet in height from the existing pavement, etc. He stated that in future cases, staff will ensure that language is clear, and those specifications are made. He did not think it was the fault of any one person or thing. He stated that the proposed grading was not on the noise wall plan, which only showed existing grading. He acknowledged that the existing and proposed grading are different. Councilmember Woestehoff asked if the noise wall to the north is in the Highway right-of-way. City Engineer Westby commented that he believes that is on private property. Councilmember Woestehoff commented that he feels the pain of the residents as he lives off Variolite where traffic moves at high speeds. He stated that he would not support the sign about the noise law as he feels that will entice people to move at higher speeds. He stated that in terms of leverage with the developer, there were notes from the Planning Commission review which states that the wall would be consistent with the existing noise wall. He noted that the EPB also suggested a noise study. City Engineer Westby replied that he is unsure if the study was completed. Councilmember Woestehoff stated that he believes this should be continued to be worked on as it is a problem worth solving and the developer should be involved. City Engineer Westby stated that he has not reached out to the fonner Community Development Director to see if he has input that could provide assistance. He commented that could be useful moving forward. He noted that he would also follow up on the study and review various past sets of minutes. He stated that the noise wall to the north appears to be within the easement, just outside of the MnDOT right-of-way. Councilmember Woestehoff asked if the same conditions exist in the area being discussed. Public Works Committee / October 19, 2021 Page 6of18