Loading...
05/12/1980 - 00013540� THE MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF THE FRI�LEY CITY COUNCIL OF MAY 12, 1980 The Public Hearing Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order, following the Board of Review Meettng, at 8:25 p.m. by Mayor Nee. RDLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSEfdT ADOPTION OF AGENDA: Mayor Nee, Councilwoman Moses, Councilman Fitzpatrick, Councilman Schneider and Councilman Barnette None MOTION by Counctlman Schneider to adopt the agenda as subm�tted. Seconded by Councilman Fttzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the inotion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS BLIC HEARING ON THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM �dro rnnoonvrnnrmT nnnirrT nin i�� MOTION by Counc�lman Fitzpatrick to waive the reading of the public hearing not�ce and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Moses. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carr�ed unam mously and the pu6lic hearing opened at 8:27 p.m. Mr. Qureshi, C�ty Manager, stated this is the assessment roll for water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer for the Paco Industrial Park Plat and the surrounding areas to the south, Mr. Qureshi reviewed the costs per front foot for water and sewer laterals and the cost of the storm sewer is $14.89 per 100 square feet for the area in the North � �rainage District and $13.42 per 100 square feet for the area �n the South �rainage District. No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment. MOTION by Counc�lwoman Moses to close ihe public hear�ng. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearin9 closed at 8•30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER IMPR011EMENT PROJECT N0. 128 MOTIOPJ by Councilwoman Moses to waive the reading of the public hearing not�ce and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried una m mously and the public hear- ing opened at 8:30 p.m. Mr Qureshi, City Manager, stated this pro�ect involves the assessment roll for water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer in a portion of the Great Northern Industrial Park Plat. The assessment rate per front foot for the water lateral is $13.53. and the front foot rate for sewer lateral is $12.52. The rate for storm sewer is $12.64 per 100 square feet of area, less previously assessed storm sewer. No persons in the audience spoke regard�ng th�s proposed assessment. � MOTION by Councilman Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by Council- woman Moses. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carr�ed unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:31 p m. 1�� PUBLIC NENRING MEETING OF MAY 12, 1980 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE ST 1979-1 AN� 2 STREET IMPROVE- MENT PROJECT MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to waive the read�ng of the public hearing notice and open the public hearrng. Seconded by Co�ncilwoman Moses. Upon a voice voie, all vot�ng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried una m mously and the public hear�ng opened at 8�31 p.m. Mr. Qureshi, Ciiy Manager, stated this assessment roll covers streei improve- ment pro�ects 1979-1 and 1979-2. They were reviewed as follows � 70TH WAY, LOCKE LAKE ROAD (68TN WAY), AND HICKORY STREET• Mr. Steven Paaverud, 7045 E. River Road, stated he has not benefitted from the improvements made behind his property and ob�ected to an assessment He stated he was told the City's po1icy regarding the method used in assessing side yards was adopted in the 1950's. He stated supposedly the pol�cy was adopted in order to 6e fair to the property owners, but didn't feel he benefttted from the improvement and it was unfair for him to pay for it. He requested the Council review this pol�cy. Councilman Schne�der stated the Council deals with this polic� every year when they review assessments. He stated he thought everyone in the C�ty has paid a side street assessment. Mr. Herrick, C�ty Attorney, stated this policy has been applied equally to all and that there is uniformity. Mrs. Lois Berg, 6809 Hickory Street, quest�oned why the assessment wasn't made on th�s year's tax statement rather than next year's. She pointed out the fact that the �ntetat rate has �ncreased and the cost of the improvement was more than was estimated. Mr. Quresh� stated the City's policy is not to assess, unless the pro�ect is � essent�ally completed He further stated the cost of the project was higher than est�mated due to the increased costs of fuel and asphalt. Mrs. Berg stated the�r portion of the pro�ect was completed last fall and felt �t could have 6een assessed this year. Mr. Qureshi stated Mrs. Berg's parttc- ular street was f�nished, but there were a number of streets in the total pro�ect which were not completed. Mrs. Berg felt it was hard to understand the higher interest cost, when they were quoted 7-%z%, and the increased cost per square foot and felt they were being penalized because the pro�ect wasn't completed Mr. Qureshi stated another way to look at it is that they now have the use of the roadway and wouldn't start paying for it until 1981. Mrs. Berg asked if there would be another raise in the interest. Mr. Qureshi stated the figures at this time are the ones vrhich would be used for the assessment. Mrs. Koenen, 6810 H�ckory Street, brought out a problem with the drainage. Mr. Johnson, 6II17 Hickory Street stated the drain is higher than the street and, therefore, not functio m ng properly. Mr Qureshi stated staff would check tnto this matter In general, these property owners on Hickory Street, who were present at the � meeting, did voice concern about the cost of the pro�ect which was h�gher than what was estimated and the higher �nterest rates on the assessment. Councilwoman Moses explained it was necessary to have a hi9her interest rate on the bonds in order to attract investors to purchase them. 1 ��t ; � � � PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 12, 1980 61-1/2 WAY, 63R� WAY AND 63-1/2 WAY. Page 3 Mr. Jim Langenfeld, 79 63-1/2 Way, felt when the improvement hearing is held and estimates g�ven on the costs of the pro,7ect and interest rates, a lot of people formed their opintons as to acceptance or re,7ection of the pro�ect. He felt it would be noted at the improvement hearing that costs can be affected one way or another 6y construction cosis and interest rates Mr. Langenfeld felt it was not feasible to pay taxes on 21 feet of finished road that is going to he taken out with the widening of East River Road. Mr. Qureshi stated if this footage is acquired, it would be severed from Mr. Langenfeld's lot. Mr. Langenfeld stated the cost for improving this 21 feet was about $5D0 and felt it was unnecessary because this property would be part of the roadway. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, stated if this cost was assessed before the title was transferred, the person acquiring that portion of the property would have to assume the specials. Mr. Langenfeld stated on-the notice of the heartng for this street improvement, it stated improvements would be assessed aga�nst the properties according to the benefi ts receiv d. He stated his argument �s he wouldn't receive any benefit and therefore, shou�Tdn't be assessed. Mr. Dick Harris, 6200 Riverv�ew Terrace, stated the City knew the East River Road improvement was in the making for five years and then went and put the im- provements in anyway, and questioned why they do things this way Mayor Nee stated the City didn't know at the time whether or not anyth�ng would take place regarding East River Road. Mr. Harris stated the County was condemtling the land. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, stated that the land was condemned for 20 years before University Avenue was expanded. Mayor Nee stated, when the plans were drawn, there was no certainty of the East River Road pro,7ect. Councilman Schne�der felt there is a valid question as to why concrete cur6ing was installed Mr. Qureshi asked if curbing they have on affirmative. 615T WAY: the radiuses were installed to match with the asphalt East River Road and Mr. Langenfeld answered in the Mr. Qureshi, City Manager, stated the City has received a letter from the Burltngton Northern Railroad ob�ecttng to the type of assessment proposed. Mr. Heron, representing Burlington Northern Railroad, stated he understands two assessment rolls were prepared for 61st Way He stated all they asked is that the Council adopt the alternate roll, realizing that obtaining the right-of-way is part of the cost of constructing the street. Mr. Qureshi stated a normal restdential street would require a 50 foot right- of-way and pointed out the City already had 30 feet dedicated from the North as right-of-way and the cost of acquiring addttional 20 feet to make the right- � of-way width of a normal residential street �s split w�th one-half going to the residential properties to the North and one-half to the industrial properties South. He explained the additional riyht-of-way was acquired from the railroad to make the road industrial width and all this ts be�ng assessed to Burlington Northern industrial property to the South. He stated the question here from Burltngton Northern Railroad is how the cost for acquiring this additional right- of-way is assessed. � 6� PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 12, 1980 PAGE 4 Mr Herrtck, C�ty Attorney, stated one of the questions is whether the diviston of the cost is ,7ustifiable, if it is not going to be divided equally on each side of the street. Another consideration is if each property being assessed benefits by at least the amount of the assessment. He stated he could see where Burl�ngton Northern would prefer the alter- nate because it is a lesser expense, but feels satisfied that the main proposal, as disiinguished from the alternate, is defensible, as long as Council feels the ra�lroad will benefit by at least the amount of the proposed assessment. Mayor Nee questioned why the cost was high. Mr. Qureshi stated it was be- � cause the cost for the right-of-way was almost $18,000. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to receive the letter of protest from the 6urlington Northern Railroad. Seconded by Councilwoman Moses. Upon a votce vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unantmously. ASHTON AvENUE: Mr Qureshi, City Manager, stated the assessment figures for Ashton are only for the westerly one-half of the roadway which has been constructed, and suggested the hearing regarding the East side of the roadway be kept open for more research on the facts and costs involved, before any assess- ment is proposed on the easterly portion of the roadway. Councilman Fitzpatrick stated the feeling has been expressed before by some of the residents that they would be willing to assume these costs, if they were gett�ng a full road. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, stated he didn't see any reason why the street improvement couldn't go forward and be completed during this consiruction season. He stated he had discussion with the legal staff of Burlington Northern as to whether the City does or does not have to acquire any r�ght- of-way for Ashton. He stated he takes the posit�on the right-of-way became � dedicated by usage. Mr. Herrick stated there was a disagreement with this position by the legal staff representing the railroad, but couldn't see any reason why the improvement couldn't proceed even if this question isn't re- solved. He stated the City may have future negotiations with the railroad or the matter may eventually have to be decided in court. Mr. Heron, representing Burlington Northern Ratlroad, stated they have filed a protest on this pro,7ect. He requested the assessments be eliminated com- pletely until the pro�ect has been completed and something workrd out with Burl�ngton Northern. Mr. Herrick felt the assessment, at least as �t applies to the railroad, should be left open or continued and that would be his recommendation to Counc�l. He felt if they chose to close the assessment hearing, as tt ap- plies to the residential propert�es, this �s a separate question. He pointed out, if action is taken on the residential portion of the assessment and the cost of the pro,7ect increases, tt would mean the Council could not 90 back and assess any additional amount to the resident�al properties because the assessment roll was closed Mr. Herrick stated tf that is the case and it turns out there are more assessment costs than what is projected at th�s time, then the additional costs would have to come from other funds. Mr. Heron requested the assessments for Ashton Avenue be set aside until the pro�ect is completed. He stated, if it ts determined the pro�ect is completed at this time, then they are protesting the assessment. � Mayor Nee stated he recalled the original proposal was to finish the street and everyone in the neighborhood really didn't want this done and agreed to the partial street as a good solution until such time as the railroad wanted an industrial street. � ,� ; _ �t _, PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 12, 1980 PAGE 5 Councilman Fttzpatrick stated he felt they didn't want �t improved at the cost of $15.68 a front foot. Mr. Larry Mewhorter, 39 - 62nd Way, stated he wouldn't pay more than the rate quoted at the hearing. He stated he would pay his share, but wouldn't pay for an industrial street that will have access to industrial property. He stated if the ratlroad doesn't want access to their property> a cul-de-sac should be constructed. He stated this started out as an tndustrial street and then signs were posted for no truck traffic. , Mayor Nee stated the residents submitted a petition requesting this street be posted. MOTION by Councilman Fttzpatrick to receive the protest from Burlington Northern Railroad. Seconded by Councilwoman Moses Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. AVENUE AND COMMERCE CIRCLE: Mr. Dick Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace, stated he was upset wtth the quality of construction the City is getting on these pro�ects. He stated he didn't know who was doing the �nspection work, but there are pieces of the road that w�ll have to be dug up and redone. He stated the Main Street roadway North of 79th is �n bad shape. He felt the City should call a halt to this type of construction. Mr. Harr�s stated the City is collecting between 25-35% of the cost of the pro,7ect for administrat�ve and engineertng costs and thinks for this kind of money, the developers should 6e guaranteed some quality pro,7ects. He stated this is not only one pro,7ect, but it is time after time, and felt someone should be out doing the inspections to make sure the ,7ob is being done ri9ht Mr. Mark Burch of the City staff stated he looked at the street and some of the curb�ng on Commerce Ctrcle and agreed there were some problems which would have � to 6e corrected before the final mat is installed. He thought the inspection work on this pro,7ect was done by Suburban Engineertng and potnted out all the samples taken did pass the required compaction tests. Mr. Harrts felt if it is determined that the City has to hire outside engineering firms to do the inspection work, then it is incum6ent on the City to make sure the work is done properly. He pointed out a few core samples are taken for testing and what ts happening in that spot might not necessarily be true 10 feet away from this area. He felt if it takes an inspector on the ,7ob from 8 to 4:30 to get compliance, then this should be done. Mr. Quresht, Ctty Manager, stated, bastcally, the inspections are left to the eng�neering consultants and they do as many as they feel is necessary to certify the �ob. He felt that in the future the City is going to try io do most of the inspections themselves. 52ND WAY AND IN�USTRIAL BOULEVARD: There was no response from the audience regarding th�s proposed assessment. ALLEY SURFACING, 6LOCK 10, HYDE PARK ADDITION: There was no response from the aud�ence regarding this proposed assessment 61ST AVENUE BETWEEN 4TH AND 7TH STREETS: � Mr. Qureshi, City Manager, stated there were no assessments to the property own rs for this pro�ect, as determined by the Council at the D9ay 5, 1980 Counctl mee�ing. There was no response from the audience regarding this assessment. � ��. �� iv PU6LIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 12, 1980 Page 6 MAIN STREET FROh1 77TH TO 79TH AVENUES Mr. Dick Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace, asked when the public heartng was held on this improvement. Mayor Nee asked if it was Mr. Harris' point that a hearing was not held and he answered in the afftrmative. Mayor Nee pointed out that the public hearing procedure is somet�mes watved, tf all property owners involved agree to the improvement. Mr. Harris stated, when work was begun on the overlay for this street, he asked when the public hearing would be held regarding the improvement and the persons he spoke with told him it wasn't going to be assessed, but paid out of State Aid funds. Mayor Nee stated it m�ght have been intended to be paid from State Aid funds, hov�ever, it would be checked. Mr. Herr�ck, City Attorney, felt the hearina on this item should be continued while the background is researched. MAIN STREET FROM OSBORNE ROAD TO 77TH AVENUE There was no response from the aud�ence regarding this proposed assessment MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearing on improvement pro,7ects ST 1979-1 and 1979-2, except for the portion dealing with the east- erly one-half of Ashton Avenue and Main Street from 77th to 79th Avenues. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously, and the public hear�ng closed at 10.22 p.m. NEW BUSINESS: RESOLUTION N0. 43-1980 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR WATER, SANITARY SEWER, AND c'rnnnn rn.irn rnnnnn�irnnrni�r nnnirrr nin ��� MOTION by Councilwoman Moses to adopt Resolut�on No. 43-1980. Seconded by Counctlman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all vot�ng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously RESOLUTION N0. 44-1980 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 128 MOTION by Councilman Barnette to adopt Resolution No. 44-1980. Seconded by Counctlman Schne�der Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR THE ST. 1979-1 AN� 2 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJCET: MOTION by Counc�lwoman Moses to adopt this resolution with the amendment that the easterly one-half of Ashton Avenue and Main Street from 77th to 79th Avenues not be part of th�s resolution. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Mr. Herrtck, City Attorney, stated he would suggest meetings with representatives of Burlington fdorthern to see if the differences can be worked out regarding Ashton Avenue. 1 � Mayor Nee questioned if there would be a problem in tabling this resolut�on. Mr. Qureshi, Ctty Manager, stated if the Council �s satisfied with the westerly , one-half of Ashton, he felt action could be taken on this protion of the roadway. Counc�lman Schneider stated he was concerned with approval of an assessment roll for one s�cie of the street, wtthout the ather s�de completed. Mr. Herrick stated unless there is some advantage to adopting the roll this evening, he thought it could be tabled for a week.