Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDec 8, 1975-369- Official Proceedings Special Meeting of the City Council City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota December 8, 1975 Assessment Hearing on 1975 Special Assessments Meeting was called to order at 7:08 p.m. Roll Call: Logacz, Heintz, Norberg, Land, Nawrocki-present Motion by Norberg, Seconded by Heintz to name Margo Emerson Secretary for the meeting. Roll Call: All Ayes STATEMENT OF PURPOSE OF THE MEETING Mayor Nawrocki stated that the purpose of this meeting is to hear the costs incurred in the various projects as listed and to authorize the levying of the assessments on the same. Mayor Nawrocki further stated that the projects would be discussed as listed on the agenda, and if the projects are approved, each would be payable over "X" number of years. Individuals would have that number of years in which to pay the assessment. If split over a period of years, there is 8% balance charged on the unpaid balance. If the assessment were to be paid in full within the first thirty days after the hearing, the assessment could be paid without interest. In this case, if paid by January 7, there is no interest. At this point Mayor Nawrocki asked for general questions from the audience. One gentleman asked for clarification on when the assessment may be paid, and in particular asked if he could pay $200.00 within the first thirty days without interest. The assessment procedure was explained to him. Each of the Projects were then discussed individually as listed on the agenda. PROJECT #689 WATERMAIN 37th Avenue, 5th to University, and along the service road east of University north of 37th Avenue The City Manager, Malcolm Watson, reported that this project had been authorized early last spring. At the initial hearing the estimate was 12½¢. AFter finding out that some costs would be higher due to the railroad requirements on running the watermain under the crossing, the various property owners were contacted again and informed that the cost would be approximately 14¢ a square foot. Ultimately, when the work was being done, the large Minneapolis distribution mains were found to be leaking and replacing of materials was needed, though not previously anticipated, and higher costs were incurred. The resultant assessment is at 17¢ a square foot. Mr. Watson explained that this would be higher than that but the city was able to hold down administrative costs due to fewer properties being assessed. He also reported that $9,000 would be paid out of the city water fund. A gentleman from Grief Brothers asked general questions on the breakdown costs and how the assessment would be handled. Mr. Watson informed him that Grief Brothers would be assessed $11,286.64 which represented a calculated amount of $12,680.64 less a credit for previous waterline payments of $1,394.00. Mr. Watson also explained the need for the project itself. He also informed those present that this assessment would be spread over eight years. At this point Mayor Nawrocki stated his observation that many of the projects to be considered at this hearing appear to have over-runs on them. He pointed out that the council should have been informed of all the over-runs long before the hearing. In the case of the 37th Avenue Watermain, he pointed out that the council was made aware of only the over-runs as a result of the railroad crossing, and not of the -370- December 8, 1975 over--runs beyond that point. He stated that he objects to the council not knoM ng of the over-runs, stating that the council always tells people at the preliminary hearings that if there is a significant change in the cost of the project from what is estimated at the time of the first hearing, then the hearing will be reopened. He stated that the council cannot reopen a hearing if they do not know of the high costs above the original estimates. PROJECTS #691 and #698, ASPHALT MAT AND CURB #691: McKinley; 39th - 40th Cleveland; 39th - 40th 39½; Cleveland - McKinley 46th; Monroe - Jefferson 43½ Avenue; 160I West of Tyler #698; Summit; 5th - 40th 2nd St; 42nd - 43rd 3rd St; 44th 45th Tyler Place; 44th - 45th Mayor Nawrocki stated that project #691 was authorized in 1974, at which time the estimated cost was $10.O0/street foot. Project :~698 was authorized in April of 1975 at an estimated cost of $12.00/street foot. Costs on all streets to be assessed at $11.97 per street foot and $3.99 per avenue foot. Assessment to be spread over eight years. Gerral Herringer asked if the city did all the base work on these projects and whether or not the city had any comparisons available between the city doing the base work, and having the contractor do it. Mr. Watson explained that the city did all the base work and that although it had been felt that the city could do the work more economically, it ultimately resulted in a fairly even amount as to what the contractor would have charged. He explained that some of the projects had to be done twice because of wash outs on the base. If the contractor had been doing the work, he would have been responsible for doing these wash-outs over, at no extra cost to the city. Mr. Herringer further asked if separate records are kept on all phases of the projects and Mr. Watson answered, explaining how the projects are broken down. Mayor Nawrocki pointed out that the projects in Project #691 had been estimated and authorized at $10.O0/street foot. The fact that these people must pay $1].97 per foot represents nearly a 20% increase. He stated that the Council should have known this. He stated that at the time the bids were taken and the bid was awarded, he (Mayor Nawrocki) had asked the question as to how these bids compared to the estimates given and that at that time he was told that the bids were very good and in line with the estimates. George Eckenroth, 1101-44½ avenue asked questions on the Tyler Place project, 44th to 45th, wondering how much the commercial property on Central paid on the project. Mr. Watson stated that these properties paid the full street assessments. He explained that two other lots, recently subdivided, face Tyler Place as well and are assessed for street footage. December 8, 1975 -371- Tom Ross, 3948 Cleveland, asked for results on core borings taken on Cleveland. The City Manager outlined a report submitted by the Engineering Department on this item and allowed Mr. Ross to examine the report more fully. Mr. Ross asked if what cracking he sees will cause problems, and Mr. Watson stated that the necessary strength of the street is there, and no problems should be encountered. Mayor Nawrocki asked Mr. Ross if there were further questions regarding driveways restoration in his area. Mr. Ross stated that he is satisfied with what was done on his property, but that some of his neighbors are not, but have given up trying to have further work done. Mayor Nawrocki encouraged Mr. Ross to tell his neighbors to call in and make their feelings known if they are not satisfied. Mr 0stmoe, 663-46th Avenue had several questions regarding the work done on his block. He stated that he is upset that the actual cost came in higher than the estimate given, pointing out that he feels a good job was not done. He stated that he had understood that the work would not be done unless Hilltop Village would agree to the work on Monroe Street, and if they did not agree, none of the project would be done. He stated that 46th is a street that goes virtually nowhere and he does not feel the work done was necessary in view of the fact that Monroe was not paved. He also stated that he feels that the people on 46th should be assessed less in view of the fact that the street is only 25 ft. wide, rather than the usual 30 ft. Also, he feels that this means that less materials were needed, and the fact that there are few properties facing 46th along this block, then fewer curb cuts were needed, and so less cost was encountered in this department. The City Manager explained that the same cost is assessed against all projects regardless of whether or not the street is full sized. He indicated that this has always been handled that way. Mr. Watson explained the progress of negotiations with Hilltop on the Monroe Street work. Mr. Ostmoe raised concerns regarding the maintenance of the street on keeping it clean, and on snowplowing in particular. Mr. Ostmoe also had questions on sodding restoration work. Mayor Nawrocki pointed out that sodding is pointed out at the time of the hearings, that it will be the responsibility of the property owner to replace sodding, etc. He stated that this results in a savings because if the city does the sodding, the contractors usually charge high costs on this item. He pointed out that only rough grading would be taken care of but not the final grading or sodding. Mr. Ostmoe stated that he invites the City Council to come and took at the job done on 46th Avenue and see if they feel that the end result justifies the billing to the property owners, if they indeed benefit by the work done. -972- December 8, 1875 Mr. Watson stated that he would be certain to let the people on 46th know of any developments regarding the proposal to install the watermain and do permanent street work on Monroe Street, 45th to 46th. Councilman Norberg pointed out that there is a question on the partitioning of costs on this project. Councilman Heintz stated that perhaps the city should re-examine the charge as to whether smaller streets with few curb cuts should be charged less than the full street. City Attorney, Ronald Kalina, stated that assessment should be based on benefit, and if the smaller street gives less benefit, i.e., less parking as pointed out by Mr. Ostmoe, then perhaps they could be charged less. At this time the City Engineer, George Brown, stated that the costs on doing the work on the smaller street are essentially the same as on a larger street. The curb costs the same and grading costs the same. Due to the fact that there is a restricted area in which the contractor can work, more problems may be encountered in constructing the street. The only essential difference would be less asphalt, but he felt that the costs which may be additional due to the restricted area would off-set the less cost on the asphaltic material. Brief discussion on Mr. Ostmoe's comment that parking is very limited, and that cars can not park across from one another due to the fact that the street is narrow. It was pointed out that the Traffic Commission should investigate the need to restrict parking in this block. Councilman Logacz stated that he feels that the same cost on the smaller width street as on the wider street should only be in effect if it can be proven that engineering work costs are the same, or that the problems are greater on the smaller street. Mr. Watson stated that it may be that the contractor will see that he has less maneuvering space at the time of the bidding, and bid higher accordingly. He too stated that the savings on material on the smaller street is overcome by the additional cost due to inconvenience. Councilman Heintz then stated that he agreed with Mayor Nawrocki in that the estimated S10.O0 per foot the year previous was what had been authorized. He stated that anything from approximately 10% as an increase on a project should be brought back to the Council for consideration. Further discussion held on 46th Avenue between Monroe and Jefferson. Certain particular questions from individual property owners were answered in regard to exact costs to their particular property. Peter Kotzer, 4201 2nd Street N.E., was concerned with the work that was done on his block. In particular, he pointed out what he saw as added problems on drainage with the new construction work. Mayor Nawrocki stated that this item had been brought up previously and he had assumed that Mr. Kotzer's questions were investigated and explanations given to him .as to the conditions present. Clayton Berg from the Engineering Department spoke on this project briefly explaining what had been done. Mayor Nawrocki pointed out that there is a difference of opinion between the Engineering Department and Mr. Kotzer and that the survey December 8, 1975 -373- made on this project following questions by Mr. Kotzer should be made avail- able for investigation at this meeting. Mr. George Eckenroth asked how the costs are divided between the various streets and avenues. Mr. Watson stated that a total cost is figured and divided to come to a cost per foot charge for each street-- this makes the same cost charged to each street project. Mr. Eckenroth stated that he felt that each street and avenue should be considered separately in light of what was done on each individually, rather than lumping all together and charging the same to all individual properties. Mr. Watson stated that the costs would be higher using a method such as this, and explained this a bit more in detail. Mrs. Gilbert, 3971 Reservoir, questioned why the City Council would authorize work to be done on a street when the majority of the people present at the original hearing were against the project. She, in particular at this point, referred to the 46th Avenue work. Mayor Nawrocki explained that the Council must take the entire discussion surrounding each project in consideration both from the citizens present from the area and from the City staff to determine whether or not a project should be authorized. PROJECT #693 SANITARY SEWER, McKinley Street, 39th to 4Oth Mr. Watson explained that the estimate on this project had been $8.00, and the actual cost to the properties is $8.95 per foot. Clayton Berg from Engineering explained why the costs had increased above the estimate. He stated that there had been an error in the old plans which were used to determine the amount of pipe which would be needed in this project. When the ground was opened up for the work to be done, it was found that an additional 80 ft. of sewer was needed and this caused the increased cost. Mr. Herringer from the area asked if the people who were assessed for the first portion of the sewer years back were assessed this 80 ft. Mr. Watson and Mr. Berg explained that this length of sewer was never assessed to anyone, so no one is paying assessments on work that was already assessed. Mr. Berg also explained that this extension of pipe did not add any properties to the assessment, as the sewer extension still serves the same properties as were listed at the original hearing. PROJECT #696 HOUSE REMOVAL 578-38th Avenue N.E. No one was present from this project so no discussion was held. PROJECT #699 BITUMINOUS OVERLAY 7th Street, 44th to 45th 41st Avenue, Central Avenue to LaBelle Park No one was present from this project so no discussion was held. PROJECT #700 CONCRETE ALLEYS University to 4th, 52nd to 53rd Reservoir Blvd. to Tyler, 39th to 4Oth Main Street to 2nd Street, 44th to 45th (including drain) -374- December 8, 1975 Mr. Watson explained that the estimate on the Main Street to 2nd Street, 44th to 45th had been S10.75 per foot and the actual cost is $10.65. The estimate on the other two alleys was $9.00 per foot and the actual cost is $8.90 per foot. He pointed out that some problems were encountered because driveways on one side of an alley were lower than on the other side. ProF, erty owners expressed a misunderstanding that the City would erect walk:s, slope back hills, and landscape as a part of the project and this was not included in the costs. Discussion held on the Reservoir Blvd. to Tyler, 39th to 40th alley. Mayor Nawrocki pointed out what he feels was left as a bad appearance on this alley with roots "hanging out" etc. He also pointed out shaggy cuts, sloping, etc. Mr. Watson explained that nothing additional can be done in this regard and explained the circumstances of the project and the work that was done. Anne Promen, 3969 Reservior Boulevard, stated that her bank is washing away as a result of the alley construction. She was also concerned that: her driveway is washing away as well. She asked what can be done because gravel that was originally in her driveway was removed during the construction and given to another property and never returned. Mayor Nawrocki asked that this matter be looked into and a letter sent to Mrs. Promen with copies sent to the City Council. Veronica Gilbert stated that she has the opposite problem from Mrs. Promen in that she has cinders, rock, gravel, etc. that she does not want which was deposited on her yard during construction and she asked that this be removed. Mayor Nawrocki asked that this also be checked into and a letter sent to Mrs. Gilbert. PROJECT #701WATERMAIN, 3817 Central Avenue The City Attorney stated that a request had been received to postpone the hearing on this project until two weeks from that evening, until the regular Council meeting of December 22nd. Motion by Norberg, Seconded by Heintz to continue the hearing on Project #701 until December 22nd. Roll Call: All Ayes PROJECT #703 SIDEWALK North side of 49th Avenue, University to 4th Street Two people were present in opposition to paying the assessment for this work. One individual stated that the only benefit on this project was to the corner house where there is a beauty shop. Mayor Nawrocki stated that the hearing had been held on this project originally and the work authorized, and now is not the time to oppose the work. Whereupon, the gentleman pointed out that he had been at the original hearing and opposed the work at that time as well. He added that he does not feel the costs are in line. Mr. Watson reported that the estimate had been $2.00 per avenue foot, with the commercial property on the corner to pay $200. The actual cost is $2.40 per avenue foot, with the commercial property to pay $240.00. Councilman Norberg expressed his disapproval that the project cost coulld go up so much without the council being told. He asked why the work was done and when the costs really went up and why. December 8, 1975 -375- Mayor Nawrocki also spoke against the fact that the Council was not told that the costs were increasing. He stated that at the time of the bids, the Council was told that the costs were running in line with the estimates. Another individual present on the project asked exactly why the work was done, pointing out that it was not petitioned for. Mr. Watson explained that the corner property had requested this consideration because it was impossible for him to keep the boulevard area clean because of the amount of foot traffic. PROJECT #705 SEAL COAT PROJECT ON VARIOUS STREETS THROUGHOUT THE CITY One gentleman asked who inspects the seal coat work and was told that the City Engineer and his staff does the inspections. The man expressed his opinion that a poor job was done on 45th Avenue, Main to University. No other discussion held on this project. PROJECT #708 TREE REMOVAL 3840-2nd Street No discussion held on this project as no one was present on this item. PROJECT #709 WEED CONTROL--VARIOUS LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE CITY No discussion was held on this project. At this point a gentleman asked questions regarding the alley paving and drain installation in the alley Main to 2nd, 44th to 45th. He asked what the storm drain cost individually and why the charge wasn't split between the two properties between which the drain was installed. Mr. Watson explained this project in detail. RECESS TAKEN AT 9:30 Following the recess Mr. Watson stated that a meeting had been set up with Mr. Kotzer, 4201-2nd Street, for 7:00 a.m. the following morning to review the drainage problems which he had pointed out. Mayor Nawrocki asked if any consideration was given to the 46th Avenue project as far as reducing the assessment because the of the narrower street. Motion by Heintz, Seconded by Logacz that the charge to property owners involved in the assessment on the 46th Avenue construction work, Monroe to Jefferson be reduced 99¢ per foot on the street charge and 33¢ per foot on the avenue charge. (This would make the street charge $10.98 per foot and the avenue charge $3.66 per foot.) Councilman Land stated that this had better mean that the City Council intends to consider each street separately in the years to come because this motion will set a precedent in that a reduced cost has never been allowed before. Mayor Nawrocki stated that this is a special case in that there is only a 25 ft. roadway instead of the normal 30 ft. Roll Call on motion to reduce charges on 46th Avenue project: All Ayes Councilman Norberg proposed at this time that the extra costs incurhed above the original estimate on the sidewalk installation on 49th Avenue, -376- December 8, 1975 4th to University, be assessed against the property who had originally asked that the installation be made. No motion made to this effect. Mr. Norberg stated that restoration work was done on this project which is ordinarily not done and this caused the extra expense. Mr. Watson explained that some sod had to be layed to hold the sand embankment in place and to protect the trees and keep the sand from running out onto the sidewalk. RESOLUTION #75-65 ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLLS Seconded by Heintz Roll Call: All Ayes Resolution #75-65 was adopted. Offered by Logacz, Adopting assessment rolls according to the City Charter for the following local improvements and determining that said improvements have been made and ratifying and confirming all other proceedings, heretofore had: Special Assessments numbered 689, 691-698, 693, 696, 699, 700, 703, 705, 708, 709. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, met at 7 olclock p.m. on the 8th day of December 1975 at the City Hall Council Chambers in the Columbia Heights, being the time and place set when and where all persons interested could appear and be heard by the Council with respect to benefits, and to the proportion of the cost of making the local improvements above described, a notice of such hearing having been heretofore duly published as required by law, and a notice mailed to each property owner of record, stating the proposed amount of the assessment; and, WHEP, EAS, this Council has heretofore estimated and fixed the cost of such local improvements and has prepared an assessment roll therefore. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS HEREBY RESOLVES: Section 1. That this Council does hereby adopt the aforesaid assessment rolls known and described as "Assessment Roll for Local Improvements numbered 689, 691-698, 693, 696, 699, 700, 703, 705, 708, 709.'l Sect:ion 2. That this council hereby finds and determines that each of the lots and parcels of land enumerated in said assessment rolls was and is especially benefitted by such improvement in an amount not less than the amount set opposite in the column headed "Total Assessment~'. And this Council further finds and determines that the proper proportion of the cost of such improvements to be especially assessed against such lot or parcel of land respectively in said assessment rolls. Section 3. That said assessments may be paid in part or in full without in- erest on or before January 7, 1976, or in annual installments for a period of from one to ten years as designated on each assessment roll, payable on or before the 30th day of September, annually, with 8% interest thereon. Faillure to pay the annual installment renders the same delinquent and thereafter a 10% penalty is added and the said delinquent special assess- ment: is certified to the County for Collection with the real estate tax. Section 4. That this Council did hereby determine and re-determine to proceed with said improvements, does ratify and confirm all other proceedings heretofore had in regard to these improvements, and said improvements shall hereafter be known and numbered as Local Improvements numbered 689, 691-698, 693, 696. 699, 700, 703, 705, 708, 709. December 8, 1975 -377- Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. Mr. Ostmoe asked whether the salaries assessed against the properties is above the regular salaries of the employees. Mr. Watson explained that this is their regular salary, and not extra. The city budget includes salaries, a portion of which paid out of general taxes, and a portion out of assessments. Motion by Heintz, Seconded by Norberg to adjourn at 10:16 p.m. Roll Call: All Ayes Bruce G. Nawrocki, Mayor