Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993 04-22 CCM Special Council Meeting MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 1993 CONSTITUTION HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special session and was called to order by Acting Mayor Pro tem Celia Scott at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL Acting Mayor Pro tem Celia Scott, Councilmembers Barb Kalligher, and Kristen Mann. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, City Engineer Mark Maloney, Public Works Coordinator Diane Spector, and Council Secretary Nancy Berg. PUBLIC HEARING - SOUTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS The City Manager explained the purpose of the meeting was a public improvement hearing. He further explained everyone who could possibly be affected by an assessment had received notice of the meeting. He continued to explain the history and background of the proposed Southeast Neighborhood improvements. The Director of Public Works used overhead slides and films to show the proposed Southeast Neighborhood improvements. The City Engineer presented se ted the engineering report and cost estimates for the proposed y g P g g P P P Southeast Neighborhood improvements. g P The Public Works Coordinator outlined the details regarding funding and the proposed assessment stabilization program. The City Manager explained the procedure for addressing the Council to the public. Councilmember Kalligher questioned whether nonqualifying residents would have to pay for the qualifying residents under the assessment stabilization program. The Public Works Coordinator explained there were some local state aid funds to pay the cost of the assessment stabilization program. 4/22/93 _ 1 _ Acting Mayor Pro tem Scott opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing to consider the proposed Southeast Neighborhood improvements at 8 p.m. She inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. Donald Welch, 5311 Dupont Avenue North, addressed the Council stating he has lived in Brooklyn Center for 38 years. He said if it wasn't broken, don't fix it. He agreed there may be a need for repair and asked for the results of the resident survey on the street improvement project. The City Manager stated 147 surveys had been returned. He explained of the 147 surveys, 86 residents were against the improvement project, 27 were undecided and 33 were in favor of the project. Mr. Welch suggested the Council let the majority rule and reminded Council the public was fed up with taxes and special assessments. Cliff Painter, 5339 Fremont, stated the street conditions were much worse in Minneapolis because Brooklyn Center maintains the streets better. He disagreed with installing curbs explaining this would be more to maintain. He also disagreed with replacing sewers at this time. He also agreed the public did not need any more taxes. He further stated he opposed the improvements. The Director of Public Works noted the City of Minneapolis has programmed reconstruction of the area just south of 53rd Avenue for 1994. Norma Rydholm, 5307 Dupont, asked if putting in new storm sewers would decrease the sewer and water bills. The Public Works Coordinator explained the improvements would reduce the cost for maintaining the water and sewer system. She further explained this would not reduce the amount of the bills but would slow the rate of increase. The Director of Public Works reiterated the cost for water and sewerage charges would not be reduced, but the rate of increase would be lessened. Mike Ronning, 5452 Dupont Avenue North, stated he was associated with the Harron Methodist Church on Dupont. He asked if the church's parking lot would be assessed separately. The Director of Public Works answered it would be assessed according to the width on Dupont Avenue. He further explained both the parking lot and the church property would be assessed if improvements are made adjacent to those properties. Mr. Ronning asked how the City would view the church's income as a non- profit organization. The City Manager answered the assessment stabilization program was not intended for churches, only for single family homes. 4/22/93 -2- Boyd Will, 5350 James Avenue North, stated he has lived in Brooklyn Center for 40 years. He further stated there could be problems with the sewer in the future, and he asked that improvements be done on a timely basis. He also stated he agreed with the project. Paul Thour, 5425 James Avenue North, asked about the HUD income limits for the assessment stabilization program. The City Manager suggested Mr. Thour see the Public Works Coordinator after the hearing and she would explain the program. Mr. Thour asked if the street improvement program was not approved, could the City still P g P PP tY replace the sewer because there was an odor problem in his area. The City Engineer agreed with that assessment and explained in this area there was a sanitary sewer main in the street and one in the boulevard on James Avenue. He recommended removal of both and replacement with one in the street. Mr. Thour again asked if the street improvement program was not approved, could the City just replace the one in the yard. The City Manager answered he did not believe so. Roger Dusbabek, 5400 Logan, asked what size the new sanitary sewer would be. The City Engineer answered it would be 8 inches, which he stated would be more than adequate. Mr. Dusbabek agreed the residents were getting a lot for the money with this program. He added the area over the last 40 years had been deteriorating, and he thought some improvements would be beneficial. Jack Kramer, trustee of the Harron Methodist Church, asked if the church would again be assessed when 55th Avenue was improved. Acting Mayor Pro tern Scott answered no, a corner lot was only to be assessed for one street. Patricia Dobbs, 5315 Camden, asked where the residents would park during reconstruction. Acting Mayor Pro tern Scott answered the residents would have to park on the side streets. Ms. Dobbs asked how long the streets would be under construction. The City Engineer explained the construction company would try to phase the construction to allow for maximum usage of the road. He further stated staff would require the contractor to keep parking as close as possible. Ms. Dobbs explained Camden was two blocks long and asked if this street would receive additional street lighting. The Director of Public Works answered the proposal included additional lighting on Camden. Bill Johnson, 5317 Colfax Avenue, explained he had an underground sprinkling system and asked how far construction would go into the yards. The City Engineer explained the construction company would go as far up the driveway as needed to match grades and not make any new problems. He asked all residents with irrigation systems contact staff, and I 4/22/93 I staff would inform the construction company. He further explained if the construction company had been notified of the system and it was damaged, the construction company would be responsible for repair of the system. Mr. Johnson stated some streets in Minneapolis had been replaced with concrete, and he asked if there was an advantage to that. The Director of Public Works answered yes Minneapolis had been using concrete for about 10 years but had changed to bituminous because of the high cost of concrete. Mr. Johnson inquired if this was an all or nothing package. The Director of Public Works answered it was not an all or nothing package. He explained it did not have to be an entire 3 -mile area. He also explained from an engineering standpoint, it was recommended the basic improvements be included -- the street including curb and gutter, sewer, and water. He added the landscaping, street lighting, and signs did not have to be included. Mr. Johnson asked if curb and gutter was an option. The Director of Public Works answered this was actually a small cost and staff highly recommended including curb and gutter. Mr. Johnson stated he approved of the project. Gerald Shudy, Bryant Avenue North explained he was 24 ears old and had owned his Y rY , a xP Y home for 3 years. He stated the sewer in front of his home was not being considered for replacement and he asked why. The Director of Public Works explained the decision as to what parts of the sanitary sewer would be replaced was based on the televised inspection. He further explained existing sewers which staff believes will last an additional 25 to 30 years would not be replaced under this program. Mr. Shudy asked how many dollars would be removed from the Public Utility Construction funds. The Public Works Coordinator explained the Public Utility Construction fund grows through interest earnings and through a small amount of each resident's water bill. She further stated the_ construction fund was generally between $2 million and $3 million. The City Manager added the auditors had reviewed the funds and the project and believed the funds would accommodate the program. Mr. Shudy questioned how much the general obligation bonds would cost the residents. The Public Works Coordinator explained the resident would pay about $4 to $5 per year per bond. Mr. Shudy asked that additional parking be provided at Bellvue Park. The City Manager stated staff would take the suggestion into consideration. He further explained the Park and Recreation Commission would be given the suggestion, and he would notify Mr. Shudy of the date the Commission would be reviewing the recommendation. Mr. Shudy complimented staff on the nice presentation and said he would leave the decision up to the Council members. 4/22/93 -4- Acting Mayor Pro tem Scott agreed there was a problem with the parking at Bellvue Park. She suggested diagonally striping the lot to allow for additional parking. She suggested Mr. Shudy and other neighbors should attend a meeting of the Park & Recreation Commission f to share their concerns. Floyd Stewig, 5455 Colfax Avenue North, stated he had never had a problem with the sewer in his area, however he was aware there were problems with the flow into Minneapolis. He further explained he had a problem when he tried to install a bathroom in his basement. He stated he was unable to because of the sewer. He asked about the watershed charges on his sewer bill each month. The City Manager explained the watershed charge was to pay for the storm sewer improvements in this area and for future project areas. The City Engineer agreed to investigate further into why Mr. Stewig was unable to install a lower - level bathroom. Mr. Dusbabek stated the annual cost for street repair was $600,000. He asked what percentage his district represented. The Director of Public Works explained the $600,000 was the cost for all streets in the City. He calculated there were 100 miles in the City, so the cost would be $6,000 per mile. He also explained the seal- coating would cost $2,000 per mile and would still be an expense whether the streets were new or old. He stated it was the $4,000 per mile for patching that would not have to be expended if the streets were new. Norma Rydholm, 5307 Dupont Avenue North, asked how wide Dupont was. The City Engineer answered it was between 30 and 31 feet. Ms. Rydholm also asked how it was determined which side of the street would allow parking. The City Manager explained staff would consult with the residents before making a decision. Ms. Rydholm asked if Dupont would ever have sidewalks. The City Manager answered the City's policy had been to install sidewalks only on main thoroughfares and on streets connecting to schools. He further added there were no new proposed sidewalks in this area. Ms. Rydholm stated Dupont is a busy street and sidewalks should be considered. Wayne Paulson, 5330 Colfax Avenue North, stated he wanted more street lights installed, but not expensive ones. He agreed with the need for a new sewer and asked if the new sewer would be maintained like the old one. The City Manager answered the pipes in his area were too shallow, and the new pipes would be of higher quality requiring less maintenance. Acting Mayor Pro tem Scott stated one of the purposes of the proposed program was to eliminate the property owners' problems. The Director of Public Works explained the proposed street lighting was at the same cost as the current lighting on a per light basis and the only increase would be for additional lighting. Mrs. Forystek, 5332 Emerson, asked if the City was going to do the same on her street. The City Manager answered no improvements were proposed for her street this year. Acting 4/22/93 -5 - Mayor Pro tem Scott explained this area had just been assessed for the alley, and Council did not want to add an additional assessment to these residents. June Scofield, 55th & Fremont, stated the project did not directly affect her now, but she reminded Council the current results of the survey indicated the people did not want it. The City Manager agreed the survey results would be a part of the Council's consideration. Irene Seburg, 5407 Dupont Avenue North, asked if there would be any additional sidewalks. The City Manager answered the existing sidewalks would be repaired, but no additional sidewalk construction was being proposed. Johanna Mills, 5517 Logan, stated Logan was a busy street, and she discouraged widening the street. She stated if the street were widened, it would further encourage traffic. Acting Mayor Pro tem Scott explained the 32 -feet width was mandated by the State. The Director of Public Works explained the street could be narrowed to 26 feet, but then the State would not allow any parking. Mr. Hanson asked why the City was not considering a sidewalk on Dupont and Logan. The City Manager stated this was the first two times anyone has spoken in favor of sidewalks. Stan Waletko, 5323 Camden Avenue North, stated he was against the project. He further stated he felt the street lighting was more than adequate. He also recommended asphalt curb rather than curb and gutters. The City Engineer explained staff had given consideration to asphalt, but maintenance of the asphalt curb was higher. Mr. Waletko stated he felt the Southeast Neighborhood was in excellent condition, and he recommended the City maintain the streets more often. He reiterated he was against the project. John Kalligher, 5548 Girard, recommended a city -wide program rather than special assessments to pay for the project. The City Manager explained Council and staff had been encouraging the Legislature to authorize cities to establish a transportation utility for some time. Mr. Kalligher asked if there could be a city -wide referendum to pay for the whole City over a 20 -year period. The City Manager stated legally this could not be done. He explained the bond money would have to be expended within a certain amount of time following the issuance of bonds, and the streets in the entire City could not be reconstructed in that amount of time. Mr. Kalligher stated he would like to have a nice street, but he worried about how to pay for it. He recommended finding a procedure to spread the assessment over a longer period of time. Acting Mayor Pro tem Scott explained the City had been working with the local Legislators to get the transportation utility bill passed, and they had been very supportive. She further stated an assessment was never easy for the Council or for the homeowner. She went on to explain she had her home appraised before and after a street improvement program, and it was appraised at $2,000 more after the project was complete. 4/22/93 -6- Elmer Peterson stated he felt all residents should be equal in paying for the improvements. He explained some of the residents who would qualify for the assessment stabilization program did not need the help. 1 Acting Mayor Pro tem Scott thanked everyone for attending the meeting. She asked residents to talk to their neighbors and encourage them to return their survey to City Hall or to write a note letting the Council know their feelings on this project. She appreciated the residents coming to the meeting and sharing their views with the Council. She noted this matter will again be considered by the City Council at its May 10, 1993, meeting. Councilmember Kalligher thanked everyone for attending the meeting and also encouraged everyone to return their survey. The Director of Public Works encouraged anyone with questions call the engineering department at 569 -3340. Elmer Peterson stated he was definitely in favor of the project, but asked that everyone pay equally. There was a motion by Councilmember Kalligher and seconded by Councilmember Mann to close the public hearing at 9:28 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 9:28 p.m. and reconvened at 9:42 p.m. The City Manager asked for direction from the Council. Councilmember Mann asked staff contact the remaining residents that had not yet responded to the survey. Acting Mayor Pro tem Scott recommended waiting on such action. Councilmember Kalligher stated two residents informed her during recess they had responded negative earlier, and now have agreed with the proposed project. Councilmember Mann stated she was concerned about orangeburg and asbestos pipes. The Director of Public Works explained if the orangeburg and asbestos were underground, they were of no danger to anyone. The City Manager assured Council staff would double -check the requirements for working with these materials. Councilmember Kalligher stated she was concerned about contacting the residents about the survey. She felt the residents might feel the City was pushing them into making a decision. Acting Mayor Pro tem Scott and Councilmember Mann agreed. 4/22/93 -7- ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Kalligher and seconded by Councilmember Mann to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:50 p.m. �A A AN4 Deputy City Clerk Todd Paulson, Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Nancy Berg Timesaver Off Site Secretarial I 4/22/93 -8-