HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-27-86 ! i
CITY OF LAKEVILLE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
FEBRUARY 27, 1986
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Zaun at Parkview Elementary
School at 7:00 p. m. Roll call was taken. Present: Council members
Harvey, Sindt, Enright, and Mayor Zaun.
Absent: Councilman Nelson, who was ill.
Mayor Zaun then introduced the city staff present at the meeting.
Keith Nelson, City Engineer; Roger Knutson, City Attorney; James
Robinette, Community Development Director; Patrick McGarvey, City
Administrator/Clerk.
The city clerk attested to the legal notice for the public hearing on
the 1986 street seal coating program.
Keith Nelson presented the past history of the city seal coating
program and indicated that the city has grown to now include 157
miles of streets with 110 miles under the maintenance jurisdiction of
the city. He indicated that in order for the city to properly
restore and maintain asphalt streets with this type of growth, it is
necessary for the city to institute a more ambitious and effective
seal coating program. He indicated that the proposal is to divide
the city into seven districts and seal coat the streets on a seven
year schedule. Mr. Nelson showed a slide indicating the boundaries
of the seven districts and indicated that the Valley Park area is
District No. One proposed for seal coating in 1986. It was indicated
that any streets constructed in 1983 or thereafter in the Valley Park
area of District One would not be seal coated under this year's
program because of their lack of need.
Mr. Nelson indicated that the total estimated cost for the '86 street
seal coating program is $216,900. He indicated that the proposed
policy of the city council would be to assess one-half of the cost to
the benefited properties in a district, and the city would pay the
other half of the cost.
He estimated that the per unit parcel cost for 1986 is $145.00, with
the city picking up half the cost and $72.50 being assessed to the
benefited property owner. He indicated that the proposed policy was
for a duplex to be considered as one-half unit for each dwelling unit
in the building and for multiple units above duplex size to be
considered one-quarter unit per each dwelling unit in the building.
He also indicated that commercial or industrial zoned property on a
city street receiving seal coating would be assessed at one and
one-half times the residential unit rate.
. # ~ •
f
CITY OF LAKEVILLE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
FEBRUARY 27, 1986
Mr. Nelson then showed a slide of the proposed project schedule for
1986, indicating that the work would be carried out primarily in July
and August. He also pointed out that the City of Lakeville would be
entering into a joint powers agreement for a joint project with the
City of Burnsville in an effort to get the lowest unit prices
possible by offering a larger contract to the bidders.
At this time the city administrator presented the assessment sched-
ule, indicating the estimated cost of $36.25 per year on the princi-
pal for two years, with interest figured at nine percent on the
unpaid principal. The first year's interest would be for a 15 month
period of time and estimated to be $8.00. The second year's interest
would be $3.25.
At this time, Mayor Zaun opened the meeting to questions and comments
from citizens .present in the audience. Mr. Don Southworth asked if
the city maintenance crews would raise manholes that had sunk far
below the street level prior to the seal coating program. The
community development director indicated that the policy of the city
was to keep the manholes 1-1/2 to 2 inches below the street level,
but if some were below that, they would be raised to that level. He
also indicated that city streets would be patched, with major flaws
corrected prior to the seal coating program.
Mr. James Carroll asked if the city was joining with Burnsville,
which one would get the work done first, and it was pointed out by
Mr. Robinette that the schedule would be spelled out in the specifi-
cations, and that the work would have to proceed when the weather was
warm enough and dry enough later in the summer. He said he did not
foresee any problems getting the work done, regardless of which city
had the work done first because of the short amount of time it will
take a contractor to apply the seal coating materials to the streets
with the dry and hot weather.
Councilman Harvey pointed out that if there was any savings due to
lower bids than what the city engineer had used to estimate the unit
costs on, that the savings would be split 50/50 between the property
owner and the city.
Mr. Maynard Foster stated that he felt the city should change the
proposed assessment policy and assess multi-family units a full unit
cost, the same as a single family house, since they use the streets
just as much. Several others in the audience indicated they felt the
same way in regard to multi-family assessments.
Pat Messinger indicated that she felt it was irrelevant whether or
not the seal coating program made the streets look better, but that
it was important to keep the streets in good condition.
2
• •
CITY OF LAKEVILLE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
FEBRUARY 27, 1986
At this time Mayor Zaun asked the council members if they had any
questions or comments.
Each of the council members indicated their support for the proposed
project and the necessity of maintaining our streets in an adequate
manner to preserve their use.
Council member Enright pointed out that she lives on a gravel road
and has been supporting the street seal coating program through her
city taxes and, yet, has no seal coating going on in front of her
property and feels that a change to a 50/50 cost sharing is fair.
Mayor Zaun asked the city attorney, Roger Knutson, what the legal
options were to the city to assess property based on the amount of
use the property puts to the streets versus the benefit to the
property. Mr. Knutson pointed out that the state statute states that
an assessment must be based on benefit to property, not on the number
of cars that may use it.
86.80 Motion was made by Enright, seconded by Harvey to close the public
hearing.
Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Harvey, Zaun, Enright,
Sindt.
Time: 7:55 p.m.
86.81 Motion was made by Harvey, seconded by Sindt to adopt Resolution No.
86-15 ordering the 1986 street seal coating project No. 86-2 and
authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications under a joint
powers agreement with the City of Burnsville.
Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Zaun, Sindt, Enright,
Harvey.
86.82 Motion was made by Harvey, seconded by Sindt to direct the city staff
to look into the possibility of changing the proposed assessment
policy to increase the assessment to multi-family units in a given
district for the seal coating program and report to the council in
time for the assessment hearing.
Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Sindt, Enright, Harvey,
Zaun.
3
• •
CITY OF LAKEVILLE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
FEBRUARY 27, 1986
86.83 Motion was made by Sindt, seconded by Harvey to direct the staff to
prepare a letter to Dakota County officials asking them to take a
look at the speed limit on Dodd Road between Pilot Knob Road and
Cedar Avenue for safety reasons and to make sure the staff commun-
icates to Dakota County the need for signalized or four way stop
intersections on the 1987 Cedar Avenue improvement project between
.160th Street and Dodd Road.
Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Enright, Harvey, Zaun,
Sindt.
Several members in the audience brought problems to the council's
attention concerning dogs running loose, cars speeding, the need for
some radar enforcement from the police department, and getting junk
cleaned up in people's yards in the area.
86.84 Motion was made by Harvey, seconded by Sindt to adjourn the special
council meeting.
Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Harvey, Zaun, Sindt,
Enright.
Time: 8:22 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
1
a~~~.
Patrick E. McGa vey, City Clerk
Duane Zaun, Ma o
4
•
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
AGENDA
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
FEBRUARY 27, 1986
7:00 P.M.
PARKVIEW SCHOOL
1. Roll call.
2. Public hearing on the 1986 street seal coating project in the Valley
Park area.
a. Attest to the legal notice.
b. City Engineer to present the seal coating program, cost estimate
and proposed assessment policy..
c. Questions and comments.
d. Motion to close the public hearing.
e. Resolution ordering the project.
3. Any other business.
4. Adjourn.