Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJun 29, 1976OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS JUNE 29~, 1976 -272- The Meeting was called to order at 8:34 p.m. Roll Call: Logacz, Heintz, Norberg, Hentges, Nawrocki-- present Motion by Norberg, Seconded by Heintz to name Karen DeBruin secretary for the meeting. Roll Call: All Ayes Mayor Nawrocki noted that the purpose of this meeting is to conduct a hearing as recommended by the Engineering Department on the repair of sidewalks in certain parts of the community. Mayor Nawrocki then introduced Mr. George Brown, City Engineer, to explain the details of the sidewalk repair and replacement program. Mr. Brown explained that a sidewalk inspection had been made in the fall of 1975 to determine which sidewalks in the City were hazardous and should be replaced. He noted that this inspection was in addition to an inspection which had been done in 1968. He explained that notices were sent to all people whose names had been on either of the two surveys and, if they felt their sidewalk was in good condition, they could be granted a release following a re-inspection by the City. He noted that the 1968 sidewalk project had been approved but never completed. He also noted that several people had repaired their own sidewalks since 1968 and that many people who had received notices would be obtaining releases. Mr. Brc.wn went on to say that not all of the sidewalk work would b.e replacement work, but that some of it would be merely patching work. He also stated that an entire sidewalk would not be done unless all of it was deemed hazardous or unless the property owner specifically requested this be done. Mr. Brown explained that a project such as this one protected both the City and the property owner from being sued ii: someone should stumble and injure themselves on the hazardous sidewalks. -273- June 29, 1976 Hr. Brown noted that the homeowners would be assessed ]00 percent for all frontage if the City did the repair work. Intersections and beyond projections of property lines will be done at the City's expense. Repair on the avenues and corner lots are normally assessed halfway down the block. These costs which normally would have been spread will be paid by the City. He also explained that if the property owner elected to do his own work, or have his own contractor do it, he would have to take out a permit with the City, so that the City could keep accurate records of the sidewalks that were being repaired. Mr. Brown then introduced Clayton Berg of the Engineering Department to explain what was deemed as hazardous sidewalk. Mr, Berg noted that all vertical separations of more than half an inch, all sidewalk heaved by tree roots, and all surface area which had deteriorated so as to prevent proper cleaning constituted hazardous sidewalk. Mr. Berg also noted that the estimated cost for the replacement of sidewalk would be $1.50 per square foot. He also noted that the restoration work which would be done by the contractor would include all backfilling and clean up work. He further stated that the root cutter which had recently been purchased by the City would aid in the removal of all tree roots which had caused heaved sidewalks. Mayor Nawrocki noted that if a portion of a homeowner's sidewalk is being replaced instead of the whole thing, the concrete which is used to replace the hazardous sidewalk would not match the existing sidewalk. He noted this as being a disadvantage to having just a portion of the sidewalk done as opposed to replacing all sidewalk. Mayor Nawrocki also noted that, according to the $l.50 per square foot estimate for repair, the average four foot by Four foot sidewalk block would cost $2~ to replace. Mayor Nawrocki then opened the floor to questions and comme n t s. Mr. Arnold Hughes of 454] 6th Street stated that he thought the survey which had been taken of his sidewalk was inaccurate. He noted that there was not more than 1/16 of an inch variance between the sections in hfs sidewalk. Mayor Nawrocki asked Mr. Hughes if any repair work had been done on his sidewalk since the 1968 survey. Mr, Hughes replied that no work had been done on the sidewalk since he moved into the home in 1960. Clayton Berg noted that a much stricter code had been used for putting sidewalks on the pending improvements list when the survey had been done in 1968 and noted this as a probable reason Mr. Hughes had received notice. He a]so June 29, 1976 -274- noted that the sidewalk would be re-inspected. Stanley Chorzempa of 4149 5th Street noted that his sidewalk was just like a table top. George Brown noted that there was no hazardous sidewalk at that address according to the 1975 survey, but that Mr. Chorzempa was still on the pending list because he had not obtained a release after his sidewalk had been on the 1968 survey. Mayor Nawrocki noted that the people who do not need to have any work done on their sidewalks should be removed from the pending list. He also noted that a letter should go to the people where work is not required. Dwight Bixler of 4Oll 5th Street noted that there are only three cracks in thirty blocks of sidewalk in front of his property. Mildred Carlson, City Assessor, noted that there had been sixty four feet in need of repair on the original survey and none on the 1975 survey, but that Mr. Bixler had not been released. It was noted that Mr. Bixler's sidewalk would have to be re-inspected and released if the re-inspection shows that no work need be done. Mayor Nawrocki noted that many people had been notified unnecessarily. He also noted that the people who were notified who do not have sidewalks noted hazardous on the 1975 survey should be re- inspected and they should receive a timely notice as to whether or not they are on the pending list of repairs and replacement. Emanuel Pitter of 4002 4th Street asked how many feet of sidewalk were listed on the survey for his property. It was noted that Mr. Pitter had 48 feet in the 1968 survey and nothing in the 1975 survey. Ernest Violet of 4152 Monroe Street wanted to know the condition of his sidewalk according to the records. Mildred Carlson noted that Mr. Violet had thirty two feet on the 1968 survey and thirty two feet on the 1975 survey. Mayor Nawrocki noted that a re-inspection would be performed and specific notice would go to Mr. Vic. let. Mr. Richard Martin of 4032 Washington Street stated that, in his opinion, a lot of the sidewalk work should have been done long ago. He stated that he believed in the sidewalk repair program as something that needed to be done and something that should be done. Mr. Martin explained that he was a letter carrier and he walked the sidewalks of Columbia Heights daily. He stated that he~ knew the sidewalks in the City better than most anyone, and he knew they needed to be replaced. He stated that the City and the~ property owners have a responsibility to keep the sidewalks in good condition to prevent people from being accidentally hurt by tripping or stumbling, and also protect the City from being -275- June 29, 1976 sued. He noted a case in which an elderly lady injured her- self in a fall on a bad sidewalk and the judgment was awarded against the municipality to stress his point that the sidewalk repair should be carried out to the fullest extent. Mr. Holen of 4100 7th Street asked how much of his sidewalk would have to be replaced. Mildred Carlson noted that there were 48 feet on the street and 64 feet on the avenue. Mr. Kluk of 4408 7th Street stated that he would like his prop- erty to be re-inspected because he did not agree with the amount of footage which was noted on the survey to be replaced. Mr. Pete Tobias of 4451 5th Street asked how many feet he would have replaced and Mildred Carlson replied that, according to the survey, he had 240 feet of hazardous sidewalk. Mr. Tobias noted that he would like his sidewalk to be re-inspected. Mr. Dombrowski of 4040 4th Street wanted to know how many feet of his sidewalk would be replaced. Mildred Carlson noted that there were 16 feet on the 1968 survey, but nothing on the 1975 survey and the procedure for being released was explained to him. Mr. Frank Miskowic of 4348 4th Street asked about the status of his sidewalk according to the survey. Mr. Brown noted that he had 48 feet on both of the surveys. Mrs. Shirley Kill of 4244 6th Street noted that the ownership of the property had changed hands since the 1968 survey and asked for a re-inspection. Mr. Norbert Moe of 4024 2nd Street asked about his sidewalk. Mildred Carlson noted that there was no work to be done and his sidewalk could be released from the list. Mr. Bednarzuk of 4209 4th Street asked about his sidewalk. Mildred Carlson noted that there was a tree on the boulevard that was pushing up the sidewalk and the sidewalk would be re-inspected. Mr. Joseph DesRosier of 4347 6th Street inquired about the number of feet that would be replaced in his sidewalk. It was noted that there were 16 feet onthe 1968 survey, but nothing in 1975 and the sidewalk would be re-inspected. Mrs. Gefre of 4420 4th Street asked about the sidewalk and it was noted that she was not listed on the 1975 survey and would be re-inspected. June 28., 1976 -276- Mr. Remarke of 4441 5th Street was also informed that his sidewall~ would be re-inspected. Mr. Macl~ey of 4100 5th Street asked how a person would go about repairing his own sidewalk. Mr. Brown noted that a set of ~pecifications would be available for those who take out a permit to do this work. He also noted that the sidewalk would be inspected after the work is completed and if it does not conform to these specifications it would have to be removed and replaced again. Mr. Eliason of 4121 2nd Street noted that there were two trees on his i~roperty that he suspected of having Dutch Elm Disease and he wished to have them removed before the new sidewalks were put in. It was noted that this situation would be checked. Mrs~Edwards of 4055 6th Street, Mr. Ellis of 4140 Washington Street, Mr. Long of 4206 Washington Street, and Mr. Gallagher of 4308 6th Street were informed that their sidewalks would be re-inspected. Councilman Norberg asked George Brown if all of the people who were having their sidewalks re-inspected would receive a letter notifying them of the outcomeof the inspection. Mr. Brown replied that they would Motion by Hentges, Seconded by Norberg to authorize the City Manager to proceed with the sidewalk repair and replacement program as advertised including a call for bids, subject to the commitments that were made for re-inspection and notice. Roll C~,ll: All Ayes It was noted that the bids would be opened on August 5 and consideration of award would be on the regular Council meeting of August 9. RECESS 9:30 a.m. RECONVENE 9:57 p.m. Mayor Nawrocki called to order the recessed meeting of June 28, 1976. Roll Call: Logacz, Heintz, Norberg, Hentges, Nawrocki-- presen~ -277- June 29, i976 RESOLUTION #76-36 REGARDING SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BEING A RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights by Motion on the 24th day of May, 1976 ordered notice of a hearing to be given to property owners, and WHEREAS, pursuant to a notice of hearin9 certain residents appeared at a Council Meeting on the 29th day of June, 1976, and WHEREAS, the Council determines to proceed with this local improvement, a portion of the cost being defrayed by special assessments under Charter provisions. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED: That the location and extent of such improvements is as follows: sidewalk replacement in various areas of the City as set forth in the "Notice of Public Hearings'~ and made a part hereof as though set forth in full. 2. That the materials to be used are as follows: concrete sidewalk That a careful estimate of the cost of the improvement has been made by the City Manager and the several ]ors and parcels of ]and fronting upon and adjacent to such proposed improvement, which he deemed benefited thereby, were properly notified of said hearings, and That the City Manager shall also list the names and owners of the several parcels so improved as nearly as can be ascertained. 5. These improvements shall also be known as Project #620. Offered by Norberg, Seconded by Logacz Roll Call: All Ayes TWO HOUR PARKING SIGNS ON 5TH STREET FROM SUMMIT STREET TO MILL STREET Councilman Heintz noted that he had spoken with his neighbors concerning the restrictions to be placed on the two hour parking signs, and he reported to the Council that they had suggested making the two hour parking signs restrictive to between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. June 29, 1976 -278- Motion by Heintz, Seconded by Hentges to authorize the City Engineer' to install signs limiting parking on 5th Street between Summit Street and Mill Street for two hours between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Roll Call: All Ayes. Mr. Watt, on noted that it had been brought up at the Council-.Staff roundtable discussion that a meeting date should be set to discuss the municipal liquor operations. Councilman Hentges noted that the figures for liquor operation sales which are given in the City Managerls weekly reports differ from those which appear in the financial statements prepared by Finance Director John Schedler. Mr. Watson explained that the difference in these numbers is the difference between net and gross sales figures. Councilman Logacz suggested that a meeting be held with Mr. Watson, Mr. Schedler, and Mr. Thomas before the general meeting is held. This meeting was scheduled for Monday, July 12, 1976, at 6:00 p.m. The gerleral meeting to discuss the liquor operations and the possibiiiity of split liquor in the City of Columbia Heights will be held on August 2 at 8:00 p.m. Motion by Norberg to notify the Highway Department to inform them that the City of Columbia Heights will stand by Resolution #76-22 on Noise Levels. Mayor Nawrocki asked if the Highway 65 project included new paving l~or the street. Councilman Norberg replied that the project included only additional surfacing to what already exists. Councilman Norberg stated that the purpose of his motion was to address the Highway Department to the specific points which are raised in the resolution. He noted that the Highway Department has to date taken no action concerning this resolution. Mayor Nawrocki suggested that the motion be amended to read: that thestaff of the City be directed to work with the Highway Department regarding the points in Resolution #76-22. He also suggested the possibility of directing the City Manager to contact Highway Department Commissioner Crawford. Mayor Nawrocki reported that, in a letter from the Highway Departm~nt to the City concerning the Highway 65 project, no reference had been made to the specific suggestion of the use of asphaltic overlay material in the surfacing of the street. He also noted that some of the suggestions that were raised in the letter were not suggestions of the City Council. -279- June 29, 1976 Councilman Norberg noted that Mr. Perez of the Pollution Control Agency would be in Columbia Heights to make measurements necessary for the Environmental Impact Statement for Jefferson Street and suggested that Mr. Perez be asked to make noise level measurements of Central Avenue. He suggested that these measurements be taken not only at Central Avenue itself, but also from places two, three, and four blocks away. Councilman Heintz seconded Councilman Norberg's motion, noting that the Highway Department should address themselves more specifically to the points in the Resolution regarding Noise Levels. It was also noted that it was the consensus of the Council for the Highway 65 project to remain in the July 30th ]erring. Roll Call on Motion: Logacz, Norberg, Hentges--aye Nawrocki--nay Motion carries. Heintz, CITY MANAGER REPORTS City Manager Watson reported that at the Council-Staff round table discussion, it had been brought up that ways to make Council meetings more efficient should be explored. It was suggested that perhaps the Council could meet with the various departments with items on the agenda to get background information and ask preliminary questions before the actual Council meeting. It was noted that this would give the staff a chance to better serve the Council. Hr. Watson suggested that such meetings be held at least once monthly. Councilman Heintz suggested holding such meetings before one regular Council meeting each month. Mr. Watson suggested that the meetings be held on a separate night from Council meetings. Councilman Norberg asked where the City stood in regard to the proposed light on 49th Avenue near Central Junior High School. Mr. Watson noted that Hilltop was notified by Northern States Power that a light should be erected in the Village of Hilltop because the school light cannot be used to handle normal lighting needs on 49th Avenue. He further noted that Hilltop would finance this light, but no formal action had as yet been taken. June 29, 1976 -280- City Attorney Kalina reported that he had been in contact with Mobil Oil regarding the easements along Central Avenue which would have to be acquired to proceed with the work to be done there. There wa~s much discussion on the ways these easements could be obtained. Mr. Kalina explained that there were two ways in which the easement,s could be obtained and noted them as follows: 1. buy an option on the easements 2. purchase the easements with a buy back provision He further explained that both alternatives would involve commitme~at to expenditure by the City of Columbia Heights. He also ~aoted that obtaining these .easements was of importance if the project along Central Avenue was to proceed. Motion by Norberg, Seconded by Logacz to authorize the City Attorney to proceed with the option to purchase easements from the Mobil Oil Company and Herringer and Son in a timely fashion and negotiate a buy back provision. Roll Call: All Ayes Mr. Kalina also noted that considerable review and work had been done on the proposed Affirmative Action Program and he further noted that information had been passed along to the Council in this regard. He referred to the informal meeting of July 6, where the Affirmative Action Program would be discussed. Mr. Kalina also reported that follow up work had been done regarding the Data Privacy Act. He noted that to carry out this program, a responsible authority would have to be appointed. He suggested the City Manager as the most logical person to be appointed with this duty. Motion by Heintz, Seconded by Hentges to authorize the City Manager to be responsible authority under the Data Privacy Act for the City of Columbia Heights. Roll Call: All Ayes Public Works Director Gustafson noted that to date ll4 trees had been found infested with Dutch Elm Disease. He explained that 111 of these trees had been elms and three of them were oaks. He also noted that the trees were approximately evenly divided between public and private land. He stated that twenty four hazardous trees had been removed. -281- June 29, 1976 Councilman Logacz noted that the City of Minneapolis was doing something in the line of preventative measures for the trees in their community. Mr. Gustafson explained that he was aware of what Minneapolis was doing and noted that Columbia Heights was also using preventative measures. Counci]man Hentges asked about the procedure for getting a rebate from the state when a homeowner's tree must be cut due to disease. Mr. gustafson explained that a homeowner can receive twenty five percent of the total cost of cutting the tree from the state provided the City of Columbia Heights verifies that the tree had to be removed due to Dutch Elm Disease. He suggested that the City tree inspector be notified before the tree is cut down so that the people wi]] be e]igib]e for this refund. Mr. gustafson then reported on the status of the buses the City had recently received from the Metropolitan Transit Commission. He noted that two of the buses had been licensed and one was currently being fixed up. It was being painted and had had new tires put on. He a]so explained that one bus would be kept in spare until there was a need for it. The third bus ~ould be used for parts. Mr. Gustafson inquired as to whether he should fix up the second bus. Counci]man Heintz noted that he would ask Linda Hansen, Recreation Director, if she thought there would be a use for this second bus. It was noted that presently the Recreation Department was sharing a bus with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority~s Senior Citizen Program. Motion by Heintz to adjourn. This motion was ruled out of order by the Chair. Mayor Nawrocki noted that some interest had been shown for putting an alley in between Taylor Street and Fillmore Street between 45th Avenue and 46th Avenue. He noted the possibility of holding a hearing on this item. Discussion was held on whether this alley would be concrete or blacktop, and Mayor Nawrocki noted that~ if the project was approved~ the materia] that was most acceptab]e to the peop]e would be used. He directed the Engineering Department to send a letter to the people in the area asking them if they would support the construction of an a]]ey, and if so, what type of materia] they wou]d ][ke to see used. June 29, 1976 -282- Mr. Brown, City Engineer, presented the plans for the traffic turn-around at Tyler Street and 45th Avenue. He inquired as to whether or not he should negotiate with the property owner at this location as to obtaining an easement. The Council concurred that Mr. Brown should design a smaller turn-around so that the easement would not have to be obtained. Mr. Brown then noted that at the seal coat hearing he had been directed to check out the need to fix curbs in the City. Mr. Brown reported that he had found more curb in need of repair than he had anticipated. He noted that there was approximately 600 feet of curb that could be replaced. It was noted that this construction would be directly related to the seal coat project and the cost would be spread accordingly. Motion by Hentges, Seconded by Heintz that the bids on curb removal and replacement be awarded to Arnold Beckman in an amount of $825 per lineal foot in an amount not to exceed $5,000 based on low competitive, informal bids. Roll Call: Logacz, Heintz, Hentges, Nawrocki--aye Norberg--nay Councilman Norberg noted that he did not agree with the way the project would be financed. Mayor Nawrocki noted that the Metropolitan Council had estimated the City of Columbia Heights' population at 21,653, which is a ten percent decrease from the last population census. The Mayor noted that this would have an effect on the City's share of Revenue Sharing and State Aid funds. He noted that the reason for this estimated decline is the drop in children entering school. Mayor Nawrocki directed City Manager Watson to gather data informing the Metro Council that the population had not declined by this great margin, and noted possible evidence as being the amount of dwelling construction which had recently taken place and the fact that only a very small percent of these buildings were unoccupied. Motion by Heintz to adjourn. This motion was ruled out of order by the Chair. -283- June 29, 1976 Mayor Nawrocki noted that something should be done in regard to the matter of finalizing the work in LaBelle Park. An informal meeting was set up for Tuesday, July 6 for the Council, Park Board, and City Planner to discuss this subject. Motion by Norberg to adjourn. Motion dies for lack of a second. Motion by Norberg, Seconded by Logacz to adjourn at l:]5 a.m. Roll Call: All Ayes Bruce G. Nawrocki, Mayor S e c r,~a-r y