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