HomeMy WebLinkAboutNov 23, 1976OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA
ASSESSMENT HEARING ON 1976 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
NOVEMBER 23, 1976
The meeting was called to order at 8:06 p.m.
Roll Call: Logacz, Heintz, Norberg, Hentges, Nawrocki---present
Motion by Norberg, seconded by Heintz, to name Ellen Prince 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 on various projects as listed and to authorize the levying of the
assessments on the same, and also what comments and questions~have arisen.
There were representatives from Assessing, Engineering and the City Manager's
Office to discuss these issues. Each of the projects were then discussed
individually and explained on how each would be assessed.
PROdECT #620 SIDEWALK REPAIR 4OTH AVENUE TO 45TH AVENUE, JACKSON STREET TO
2ND STREET
The City Manager reported that this project had been on the books since
1968. The reason for this is that the City could not get bids. The
estimate compiled in the Spring was $1.50 on streets and $0.50 on avenues.
The actual cost came to $1.65 a foot on the street and $0.55 on the avenue.
The City picks up the additional $1.10 on all avenue work. The Mayor called
for questions at this point.
Donald Bowe, 4421 Washington Street, stated that he was not properly notified
of any sidewalk replacement to be done. The only thing that he did receive,
he so states, was put in the mailbox by the engineers stating that they were
going to do some root cutting but there would be no charge. If he had known
they were going to remove two perfectly good squares of sidewalk he would
have hired his own contractor, as he feels that this would be cheaper and
better quality. Clayton Berg stated that sidewalk repair was necessary if
there was excessive cracking, ~upheaving from tree roots, separation of ½ inch
or more above or below, and also if there was any spaulding.
Peter Tuczapec, 4340 4th Street, stated that his sidewalk was crushed when the
City installed curbing. He received a bill of over $100 and he has not been
employed but for 12 weeks of this year. The Engineering Department states that
they were unware of this damage.
The Mayor stated that he felt that the project should be passed as is because
the residents had been notified and the sidewalks had been marked for repair.
The Mayor also asks that the situation at 4340 4th Street be looked into by the
Engineering Department.
PROJECT #706 STORM DRAIN STRUCTURES
1. 42½ Avenue to 43rd Avenue, 330 feet west of Fillmore Street
Mr. Watson explained that the original estimate of $0.054 and the actual
cost of $0.0544 was very close. There were no questions or comments.
November 23, 1~76
t-'Jrd A. venue to /'7.~-,Avenue, Pierce Street to NcLeod Street
The estimate of this project was $0.0082 compared to the cost of $0.0086.
Mr. Watson also explained what was actually done in this project. He
stated that the City had trimmed the embankment and had put in a concrete
bank. There is now somewhat of a walkway. It is our opinion that the
job turned out well and quite economical.
At this point, the Mayor called for questions or comments.
Floyd Moore, 1309 43rd Avenue, wondered if it was just a rumor that 2 Jots
east of Pierce Street on ~3~-Pvenue were not bain9 charged. He said that
some of the higher Jots do not contribute to the system. He fe]t that
even though he does not benefit nor is he contributing, he would still be
willing to go along with the project. Hr. Berg stated that there had been
3 lots removed from the assessment ro]] as they did not apply and should
not have been on the rolls due to the decision at a past hearin9. Mr. Watson
sfaC.ed that a lengthy discussion had been he]d at that previous hearing
an~ that it is a real problem when only a few would benefit.
Hark Fischer' questioned his bill as he ~as not notified that it had been
cancel]ed. The Assessing Department stated that this error was caught
as a resu]t of a te]ephone ca]] from Mrs. Skalicky. She had stated that
she would notify the Fischers and the Latawiecs. Councilman Heintz stated
that in the future, the Assessing Department shou]d properly notify the
people of status on the assessment roi]s.
Councilman RorbeF9 also wondered whether the elimination of those residents
from the assessing rolls would result in a shortage in monies. Both the
Assessing and the Engineering Departments indicated that there should not
be a problem as the extra 15~ administration charge should take care of
any possible shortage.
At t:his point, the Mayor explained the assessment co]]ection procedures.
Ther'e would be no interest charged on any paymer, ts made before December
1976.
The Fillmore Street project was proposed tc run 6 years and the McLeod Street
project ~as proposed to run for 2 years.
PROJECT #710 BLACKTOP ALLEY WITH DRAIN, Q2ND AVENUE TO &3RD AVENUE, JACKSON
STREET TO VAN BUREN STREE?
Mr. Watson reported that the estimate had been $5.25 and that the actual
cost came to $5.10. The grade on ~2nd Avenue edge was lowered 2 3/~i~' and
the grade was raised ]~'~ ~t 200 feet south of l~3rd Avenue. There were
also some other variations. The alley now has good depth and enough drainage.
RobeFt Bowe, -~i206 Van Buren Street, felt that the job was very poor. They
used poor material which means they need to sweeF every day. We could have
done a better job if we had waited until spring. The Mayor stated that he
had taken a drive through the alley on Sunday, Hovem. ber 20th and he felt
it was a very good job.
November 23, 1976
Mr. Bowe also said the material was too coarse for an incline and it could
not be packed in cold weather. He challenged any one of the Councilmen to
stop by and he would show them what he meant. Councilman Hentges wondered
about this peeling and if we had gotten a guaranty from the contractor.
Councilman Norberg stated that if there is a problem in the spring, then is
the time to contact the contractor. Mr. Berg stated that seal coat would
give it a smooth appearance but this has to be done in warm weather.
Mr. Sahli, 4225 Jackson Street, stated that he felt that he has a bad incline
and that a water hole has been created. He is not satisfied with the job.
He also stated that his neighbor damaged his muffler due to the incline. He
felt that another overlay may help and that it would not be so coarse.
Mr. Watson said that all the depths were checked and they had fallen in
line with the original design.
Mrs. Tabaka, 4206 Van Buren Street, stated that she felt the contractor had
hurried with the job and she did not appreciate having to go out and sweep
every day. Mr. Bachman commented that the contractor should take more time
and put some pride into the work. He felt it was too rough and that the rock
would loosen in the rain.
Mr. Lundholm, 4250 Van Buren Street, recently sold his home but was wondering
if there had been an option to put in concrete instead of blacktop. He
also wanted to know how the storm drain would be charged. Mr. Berg explained
that the storm drain was charged in the overall project and all of the above
had been discussed at the hearing.
Councilman Hentges stated that at the present time, the City is holding money
from the contractor. The Mayor then stated that if there are no further
questions or comments the project is proposed to be spread over a 4 year period.
PROJECT #692 WATERMAIN, MONROE STREET, 45TH AVENUE TO 46TH AVENUE
Mr. Watson explained that the original estimate on this project was $11.OO a
foot and a $500 connection fee for new water connections. The actual cost
came to $4.50 and a $340 connection fee. The Water Fund and Hilltop picked
up asharewhich made the difference in the estimate. Hilltop gave us their
CETA share to pick up their cost.
There was a question regarding 668 feet of construction and also what happened
to the stop boxes. Mr. Berg e~plained that there was 668 feet of construction
but 791 feet assessible property counting going around the corners which brought
the individual costs down. The supply cost was a carryover from past years on
the 46th Avenue project.
Harold Ostmoe, 663 40th Avenue, felt that the $500 hookup charge was excessive.
Engineering explained that this project was very expensive because of all the
pipes already in the street. The Mayor explained that Hardrives gave the City
the best bid. This project would be spread over 10 years because they were
also being assessed for project #711, curb and street surfacing.
PROJECT 3711, CLRB, GUTTER A~;D ASPHALT
The actual cost on this came to $12.00 per foot on street and SL~.o0 per
foot: on avenues~ as con-.pared with the estimates of $14..00 on street and
SZi.(}7 on avenues. The I!ayor explained that a]] proFerties will eventually
be paying an avenue charge as we]] as a street charge.
1. Monroe Street, Z~Sth /~venue to ~'i~cth Avenue.
The question was raised as to whether Hi iltcp was assessed for the aeth
Avenue project in ]775. The Engineering Department states that they feel
that: we do not have the right to assess Hi]]tcp.
It was also asked if assessment hea~ing procedures were covered by ordin-
ances or charter. The attorney stated that according to the state law, the
Council can enforce the beneficiaries to pay assessments.
It was then asked if it is justifiable to charge interest for the full year,
when a resident may only be late in payment for only a few days. The
Mayor explained that after January 1st, the interest becomes part of that
year's installment.
Councilman Norberg questioned the amount of interest that the City is pay-
ing on PIP, bonds at the present time. The City pays 5 B//a?~ interest but
we had estab]ished 8fig in con/parision to the banks charge to meet the in-
terest needs on the entire bond.
The $12.00 cost this year was a surFrise, as it cost 511.~ in 1975 on
the zteth Avenue project. One gent]e~ia~i commented that he felt Hardrives
did a great job.
Mr. Holstein, Z~28 .Honroe Street, asked if the job was completed. Mr. Berg
stated that some cleanup was left at the corner of Zt~,th Avenue and h!onroe
Street. The right-of-way for ti'.i:. ;!"or,Potion ;,'as questioned and the inter-
section had to be redone. Hi ]]t(,p requested that an easement be clear on
the Columbia Heights side. This extra cost was inciuded in the overall
costs. Mr. Holstein also stated that he would like to have his driveway
checked. The City Engineer stated that the contractor is to check the
blacktop apron and put in posts.
Thc /~':ayor requested a follow-up on this item with a letter' to Mr. Holstein.
There was also some discussion on the weight restriction.
Ronald Lein, ~525 Honroe Street, stated that he felt that the whole project
turned out badly.
Councilman Norberg stated that if we could have a street guaranteed never to
break up, none of us would be able to afford it. Out of al! the notices that
went out only about 10?~ are here tunight:, so most of the people must be happy
with the projects.
2. Project 7711, Stinson Boulevard, Silver Lane to /~}rd /~venue.
Robert Hampel, it020 Stinson Boulevard, wanted to know about the avenue charge.
November 23, 1976
There was some discussion on what constitutes the avenue.
The City Attorney stated that this would be up to the Council. The City
Engineer commented that this had also been discussed at the hearing. Council-
man Norberg stated that because this is an irregular street, it is only an
artifice, and therefore everyone pays a street and avenue assessment at
sometime or another.
Roll Call on procedures for assessing: Logacz, Heintz, Norberg--aye
Hentges, Nawrocki--nay
3. Benjamin Street, 43rd Avenue to 45th Avenue.
Mrs. Gerberg, 4410 Benjamin Street, asked why the south half of the block
was charged for 43rd Avenue and the north half was charged for 45th Avenue,
which is a state aid street. She also had some pictures showing the job
done on her driveway approach. It was explained that any curb or sidewalk
on 45th Avenue would be assessed, but mat would be paid out of state aid
funds.
Mr. Berg felt that the approach was structurally sound, but agreed that her
driveway did not look as it should. He, however, did not feel that the
driveway needed to be redone. He suggested getting some adjustment on her
billing from the contractor.
A letter from David Hall, of 4417 Benjamin Street, was read which states a
request to be removed from the assessment roll for 43rd Avenue as he felt
he is closer to 45rd Avenue. The Council agreed to assess the sou~h half
of the block based on front footage the same as the west side.
4. 43rd Avenue, Reservoir Boulevard to Benjamin Street.
Mr. Wycoff, 4261 Reservoir Boulevard, stated that water drains into his prop-
erty because the curb is too low and there were large rocks in the fill that
was used. Mr. Berg stated that the old curb was 5'l and the new curb is 6".
He suggested the Mr. Wycoff let the City come in and build up the boulevard
to deter the water.
5. Tyler Street, 43rd Avenue to 45th Avenue.
Harriet Blaido, 1911 44th Avenue, felt that she should not have to pay an
avenue charge on a street that is a deadend. The Council ruled to delete
the parcels on the north side of 44th Avenue that do not have direct access
to Tyler Street because this street is of no value to them. The City Attor-
ney stated that if this change would increase the cost to other residents,
another hearing would have to be held. It was stated that this possible
loss would be no problem as the cost could come out of the 15% administration
charge.
Mr. Hallgren, 1900 44th Avenue, who already paid a street charge when 44th
Avenue was put in and now again was being assessed a street charge for Tyler
Street, requested to be assessed an avenue charge since he had already paid
street charge for 44th Avenue in the past.
NoveI~:beF 23, 1576
6. Polk Street, l+lst &venue t~; ;~$rd Avenue.
There was no discussion.
7. Hayes Street, 37th Avenue to ~.,~C'*h~ /~venue.
Hr. &ntinozzi, 3841 Hayes Street, felt that he and the owner of the back lot
should split the assessment against their lots. The Council decided that the
method as it stands is fair.
Theo,Jore Panes, 38b,~ Hayes Street, wondered if !_his pr~:ject was completely
done., f~r. Berg stated that it was done and that P,r. Panes~ boulevard was
his responsibility to sod. Soddinc~ of the boulevard ~/as not in the contract,
as was explained at the pre!iFinary hearing.
Again someone questioned if there was a guarantee on the work so that future
possible problems could be solved.
" * .,*Eu 0~] THE PUBI_ICATIO~
PRO~II--CT ~7715 SEAL COAT ON V/~F;IOUS STREETS AS Lic~'';'
Hr. Nordness, L.'ztO1 Reservoir Bculew;rd, stated that the seat coat was not
done,, in front of his property. This was verified by the Engineering De-
partment. It was also stated, that three parcels should be deleted from the
assessment roi Is.
FROJECT /:715 TREE REt,!OVAL
The billing of this project does not reflect the state and city subsidies,
which will be sent out in the form of a check tc the proper individuals
after' the City is compensated by the state.
Stei]a Hudak, ~}/t~. 5th Street, wanted to hi re her own contractor for $100.
However, the City had the ~ork done by the contractor end Rs. Hudak was
bi]]e.d $]72.50. According to City records, Mrs. Hudak was first notified
of the tree removal on July 3, ]976 and the work was completed on August
11, 1.~76. Ordinarily a 25 day notice is given. A me~:~ber from the Park
Board was net at the meeting to comment on this matter.
PROJECT #716 DELINO_UENT BILLS
The Nayor wanted to know how someone with a delinquent multiple dwe]]ing
license could continue to operate. Hr. Watson stated that delinquent bills
are assessed. Thus we are assured that the costs wi]] be paid.
RESOLUTION #76-61
ADOPTIHG ASSESSHENT ROLLS
Adopting assessment rolls according to the City Charter for the following
local improvements and determining that said improvements have been made
and ratifying and confirmin~ all other pl-oceedin~s, heretofore had:
Special Assessments numbered 620, ~92, 706, 710, 711, 713, 715, and 716.
~,HEREAS, the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Hinnesota, met
at $ o'c]ocL p.rr,, on the 2~;rd day of November, 1'~76, at the City Hall
Council Chambers in Columbia Heights, being the time and place set when and
November 23, 1976
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,
WHEREAS, 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
620, 692, 706, 710, 711, 713, 715, and 716.I'
Section 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 benefited by such improvement in an amount not less than the
amount set opposite in the column headed "Total Assessment.'l 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
interest on or before December 30, 1976, or in annual installments for a
period of from one to ten years as designated on each assessment roll, pay-
able on or before the 30th day of September, annually, with 8% interest there-
on. Failure to pay the annual installment renders the same delinquent and
thereafter a 10% penalty is added and the said delinquent special assessment
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 620, 692, 706,
710, 711, 713, 715, and 716.
Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
Offered by: Logacz Seconded by: Heintz
Roll Call: Logacz, Heintz, Norberg, NawrockiB--aye
I-tentges---nay
Councilman Hentges explained that his nay vote was because he felt the
avenue assessment is not equitable.
The continued regular meeting of November 22nd was to resume, but because of
the lateness Of the hour, the meeting was recessed until November 24, 1976 at
6:00 p.m.
November 23, 1~76
Notion by the Chair, seccr:ded by Heintz, tc adjourn the meetincj at
l:.q.~ a.m.
Roll Call:
Logacz, Heintz, Hentc~e~.. _,, Na,,'rocki---aye.
Norberg---nay
Bruce G. Nawrock[, Fi"ayor '
Sec re t~'~ ry
EP/bap