Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8A - 2011 and 2012 Improvement Project (Boudin's Neighborhood)f PRIp~ ti O` 'T U ~ 4646 Dakota Street SE ~INNES~~P Prior Lake, MN 55372 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2010 AGENDA #: 8A PREPARED BY: LARRY POPPLER, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER PRESENTER: LARRY POPPLER, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE 2011 AND 2012 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS (BOUDINS NEIGHBORHOOD) DISCUSSION: Introduction The purpose of this agenda item is to hold the Public Hearing to consider a resolution ordering the 2011 and 2012 Improvement Projects and the preparation of plans and specifications. A super majority (4/5) is needed to approve the resolution. History At its June 21, 2010 meeting the City Council adopted Resolution 10-059 authorizing staff to prepare a Feasibility Report for the 2011 and 2012 Improvement Project as outlined in the CIP and required for the Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 process. The Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 process is required because the City Council intends to specially assess a portion of the project. The roadways studied in the report include: Boudin Street, Denese Street, Lois Avenue, Natalie Road, Timothy Avenue, Grayling Circle, Rutgers Street, and Watersedge Trail. The reconstruction of these streets is scheduled for construction over a two year period. It is recommended based on the constructability preference that Grayling Circle, Rutgers Street, and Watersedge Trail be constructed in 2011 and the balance of the streets be constructed in 2012. The recommendation of the Feasibility Report was to proceed with this project. On October 4, 2010, Council adopted Resolution 10-091 accepting the Feasibility Report and calling for a Public Hearing on November 15, 2010 for the 2011 and 2012 Improvement Project. Current Circumstances The Public Hearing will cover the reconstruction of Boudin Street, Denese Street, Lois Avenue, Natalie Road, Timothy Avenue, Grayling Circle, Rutgers Street, and Watersedge Trail, including sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, aggregate base, concrete curb and gutter, bituminous surfacing, storm water pond, and appurtenant work. The properties deemed to specially benefit from the improvements, in most cases the properties abutting the streets located in the project area, are subject to assessment. Each of the affected property owners have been notified in accordance with the statute regarding tonight's Public Hearing. A Public Information Meeting was held on November 10, 2010 to provide the property owners an opportunity to discuss the project in an informal setting prior to the Public Hearing. Staff presented the proposed improvements, project costs, estimated assessments and answered general questions regarding the project. The Public Information Meeting also afforded staff an opportunity to provide additional information regarding the voluntary raingarden / "Lake Friendly" program, tree program, and driveway reconstruction program. For this project staff has evolved the raingarden program to include other storm water best management practices. Staff will be working with the Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District and the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District to locate raingardens or other water quality features based upon efficiency. Comments and interest shown for the programs will be presented at the Public Hearing. Conclusion City Staff is prepared to discuss each of the concerns presented at the Public Hearing. If, in the Council's judgment, the issues should be addressed in the plans and specifications, direction could be given to staff. The purpose of this Public Hearing is to determine whether the project should move forward to the next step, which is preparation of plans and specifications which will provide greater information about expected project cost and, therefore, the assessments associated with the improvements. Once the plans and specifications are completed, they will be submitted to the City Council for approval and authority to advertise for bids. The Council could decide not to continue with the project upon receipt of bids. A separate Assessment Hearing will be conducted following review of the proposed assessments by the City Council's Assessment Review Committee. In summary, the project is feasible from an engineering and economic standpoint. If the preparation of plans and specifications is approved, the work will be completed by City staff. ISSUES: Street and Storm Sewer Reconstruction Pursuant to the Assessment Policy, the street and storm sewer reconstruction should be assessed at up to 40% of the total project cost against the benefiting properties. The remaining amounts should be recovered through the general ad valorem property tax. The Assessment Review Committee agrees that the project should be constructed based on the "Constructability Preference" outlined in the Feasibility Report. The "Constructability Preference" assures that the project is sequenced in a manner that makes the most sense from a construction perspective. This recommendation means that Grayling Circle, Rutgers Street, and Watersedge Trail are constructed in 2011 with the balance of the neighborhood constructed in 2012. Assessment Map Based on the analysis from Nagell Appraisals, the Assessment Review Committee recommends the removal of the commercial properties from the assessment map. Assessment Method The Assessment Review Committee recommends the unit method of assessment for the 2011 and 2012 Improvement Project due to the fact that the lots in the project area are of similar size and/or value. The estimated assessment rate is proposed at approximately $8,300/unit. Based on the benefit appraisals from Nagell Appraisals, the estimated assessment rates 2 are supported although the Assessment Review Committee will be meeting once again once bids have been secured to further evaluate assessment issues. Street Widths Reduced As a way to decrease upfront costs, maintenance costs and reduce the amount of impervious surface, the Assessment Review Committee agrees with Staff's recommendation to reduce the street widths in the project area. To discourage commercial parking along Timothy Avenue, the Assessment Review Committee also recommend that Timothy Avenue between Boudin Street and Denese Street be constructed to 24 feet in width and no parking signs be placed at that location. Boudin Park Storm wafer Improvements Two biofiltration/bioretention areas and two underground stormwater storage facilities are proposed to be constructed within Boudin's Park. The Assessment Review Committee agrees that these improvements are a positive step toward retaining water upstream of Lower Prior Lake. Funds for construction of these storm water components would be taken out of the Water Quality Fund and grant funding. Driveway Reconstruction,Raingarden / "Lake Friendly", and Urban Reforestation Programs The Assessment Review Committee recommends continuing the driveway reconstruction program, voluntary rain garden / "Lake Friendly" program, and urban reforestation program. City Staff is proposing to revise scope and structure of the City's cost share for the voluntary rain gardens to better focus on clean water outcomes based on cost efficiency. A partnership is proposed between the City, Scott Soil and Water Conservation District (SSWCD), and the Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District (PLSLWD). Cost efficiency of a variety of practices is proposed to be studied by the SSWCD and City. The SSWCD will perform this subwatershed analysis. Once the study is performed, the PLSLWD and SSWCD will create a preapproved cost share program with each practice funded to the extent it provides a positive clean water outcome, with more efficient practices provided a higher subsidy. Properties found to be less efficient will still be allowed to participate in the clean water program; however, they will have to pay for a percentage of the construction based on the efficiency analysis such that public funds pay a uniform cost based on amount of water quality benefit provided. The partners will also create a comprehensive targeted marketing effort directed toward incentivizing and encouraging clean water outcomes. This evolution of the rain garden program will assure that taxpayer dollars will be spent in the most cost efficient manner. Development of this program will be contingent on funding approval from the PLSLWD. Detailed program scope can be reviewed in the attached "Lake Friendly" program document. The Assessment Review Committee recommends allowing parking structures on 24 foot wide roadways, however the parking structures must be part of the driveway program, must be paved, and property owners must pay for the reconstruction of the parking structures from the curb line to the outside edge. FINANCIAL The 2011 and 2012 Improvement Projects are proposed to be financed by IMPACT: special assessments, tax levy, water quality fund, private funding, and sewer and water fund. Funding sources and amounts are as shown below: Assessments $1,233,244.74 Tax Lev $2,079,787.14 Sewer & Water Fund $925,723.41 Water Quality Fund and Grants $176,548.46 Private Funding Drivewa Pro ram $154,610.00 Pro'ect Total Cost $4,569,913.75 The 2011-2012 Transportation Plan estimated a total project cost of $4,130,000 excluding grant funding and driveway (private) funding. The Feasibility Report estimated project costs excluding grant and private funding of $76,500 and $154,610 is $4,338,803.75. The $208,803 (5%) increase is due primarily to actual soil conditions and required replacement of those soils for street construction. Should the actual bid prices reflect this estimated increase the City Council will need to evaluate 2011 and 2012 bonding projects and may desire to bond the project levy amount over a three year period rather than the two project years to maintain the programmed bonding portion of the general tax levy. The estimated project amount is within 5% of the budgeted funding and therefore Staff believes the project should proceed as proposed. Holding the Public Hearing and ordering the plans and specifications does not obligate the City Council to complete the project or limit the City's financing options at this time. The City will be soliciting the Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District for grant funding for this project. Grant funding secured by the City will be used toward water quality initiatives including the SSWCD subwatershed analysis, "Lake Friendly", and City water quality features located in Boudin's Park. The amount of funding secured will dictate the number of rain gardens and other water quality features constructed on this project. The most cost efficient features will be selected for construction. ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives are as follows: 1. Conduct the Public Hearing and approve a resolution that orders the 2011 and 2012 Improvements and authorizes City staff to prepare plans and specifications. 2. Table the Resolution for a specific reason. 3. Deny the Resolution. RECOMMENDED Alternative No. 1 MOTION: Revie by: Frank Boyles, ity M Hager 4 f~ PRip~ ~~ C~ U trf ~INNESO~~ 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 RESOLUTION 10-xxx ORDERING 2011 AND 2012 IMPROVEMENTS AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRAYING CIRCLE, RUTGERS STREET, WATERSEDGE TRAIL, BOUDIN STREET, DENESE STREET, LOIS AVENUE, NATALIE ROAD, AND TIMOTHY AVENUE Motion By: Second By: WHEREAS, the Prior Lake City Council on its own initiative has determined that it desires to complete the 2011 and 2012 Public Improvement Projects; and WHEREAS, on October 4, 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution 10-091 accepting the Feasibility Report and calling for a Public Hearing to be held on the 2011 and 2012 Improvement Projects which includes the reconstruction of Grayling Circle, Rutgers Street, Watersedge Trail, Boudin Street, Denese Street, Lois Avenue, Natalie Road, and Timothy Avenue including sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, aggregate base, concrete curb and gutter, bituminous surfacing, storm water pond, and appurtenant work; and WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held on the 15th day of November, 2010, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, since the project is initiated by the City Council it must be approved by 4/5ths vote in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 429.031 Subdivision 1(f); and WHEREAS, the Scott County Soil and Water Conservation District is prepared to offer assistance to develop the rain garden / "Lake Friendly" program including the study of the watershed and community outreach. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE MINNESOTA as follows: 1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein. 2. The City Engineer is hereby authorized to prepare plans and specifications for the improvements delineated in City Council Resolution 10-091 adopted October 4, 2010 and by the required statutory 4/5ths vote does hereby order the project. 3. The City Engineer is hereby designated as the Engineer for these improvements. 4. The Engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvements for the 2011 Improvements to Grayling Circle, Rutgers Street, antl Watersedge Trail. 5. The Engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvements for the 2012 improvements to Boudin Street, Denese Street, Lois Avenue, Natalie Road and Timothy Avenue for a construction contract approval no later than June of 2012. 6. The City Engineer is hereby authorized to develop a raingarden 1 "Lake Friendly" program in cooperation with the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District and Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District, according to the project scope for the 2011 and 2012 Improvement Projects funded wholly or in part by the Water Quality Fund and grant funding. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2010. YES NO M ser M ser Erickson Erickson Hedber Hedber Keene Keene Millar Millar Frank Boyles, City Manager TASK 1: Rain Garden Subwatershed Assessment TOTAL WATERSHED CITY OF ITEM # DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY UNIT PRICE COST DISTRICT PRIOR LAKE 1 PROJECT ADMINISTRATION & PARTNER UPDATES (KUPHAL) HOUR 4 $ 70.00 $ 280.00 $ 140.00 $ 140.00 2 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE (JAVENS) HOUR 8 $ 70.00 $ 560.00 $ 280.00 $ 280.00 3 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE (BINTNER) HOUR 4 $ 43.00 $ 172.00 $ 86.00 4 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE (WD) HOUR 4 $ 35.00 $ 140.00 $ 140.00 5 BMP SCOPING & EFFICIENCY MODEL(JAVENS) HOUR 16 $ 70.00 $ 1,120.00 $ 560.00 $ 560.00 6 BMP SCOPING 8< COST ESTIMATE (BINTNER) HOUR 16 $ 43.00 $ 688.00 $ 688.00 7 BMP SCOPING (KINNEY) HOUR 8 $ 50.00 $ 400.00 $ 400.00 8 SUBWATERSHED ASSESSMENT MODEL (JAVENS) HOUR 40 $ 70.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 1,400.00 $ 1,400.00 9 COST BENEFIT MODEL (JAVENS) HOUR 16 $ 70.00 $ 1,120.00 $ 560.00 $ 560.00 10 COST BENEFIT MODEL (BINTNER) HOUR 16 $ 70.00 $ 1,120.00 $ 1,120.00 11 COST SHARE FORMULATION (JAVENS) HOUR 16 $ 70.00 $ 1,120.00 $ 560.00 $ 560.00 12 COST SHARE FORMULATION (BINTNER) HOUR 16 $ 43.00 $ 688.00 $ 688.00 13 COST SHARE FORMULATION (WD) HOUR 8 $ 35.00 $ 280.00 $ 280.00 14 FINAL REPORT AND PRESENTATION (KUPHAL, JAVENS) HOUR 8 $ 70.00 $ 560.00 $ 280.00 $ 280.00 TOTAL SUBTOTAL $ 11,048.00 $ 4,600.00 $ 6,362.00 In-Kind $ 820.00 $ 2,582.00 Cash $ 7,560.00 $ 3,780.00 $ 3,780.00 TASK 2: "Lake Friendly" and Raingarden Public Involvement ITEM # DESCRIPTION TOTAL WATERSHED CITY OF UNIT QTY UNIT PRICE PRICE DISTRICT PRIOR LAKE 1 PROJECT ADMINISTRATION & PARTNER UPDATES (KUPHAL) HOUR 8 $ 70.00 $ 560.00 $ 280.00 $ 280.00 2 CREATE BROCURES AND PROGRAM MATERIALS (MILLER) HOUR 36 $ 70.00 $ 2,520.00 $ 1,260.00 $ 1,260.00 3 CREATE SELF ASSESSMENT SCORING SYSTEM & WEB PORTAL (SWCD) HOUR 8 $ 70.00 $ 560.00 $ 280.00 $ 280.00 4 PUBLIC MEETING ENGAGMENT (MILLER) HOUR 8 $ 70.00 $ 560.00 $ 280.00 $ 280.00 5 INITIAL LETTER AND PHONE CONTACTS (MILLER) HOUR 20 $ 70.00 $ 1,400.00 $ 700.00 $ 700.00 6 SITE VISITS AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT (ZWONITZER OR THOMPSON?) HOUR 8 $ 70.00 $ 560.00 $ 280.00 $ 280.00 7 SITE VISITS AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT (MILLER) HOUR 80 $ 70.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 2,800.00 8 BLUE THUMB GUIDES EACH 40 $ 10.00 $ 400.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 9 "LAKE FRIENDLY" RECOGNITION AND GARDEN SIGNS EACH 88 $ 20.00 $ 1,760.00 $ 880.00 $ 880.00 10 PROJECT TEAM COORDINATION (MILLER, KUPHAL) HOUR 10 $ 70.00 $ 700.00 $ 350.00 $ 350.00 11 PURCHASING AND CONTACT FOR NON-PROJECT ITEMS (JAVENS, KUPHAL) HOUR 32 $ 70.00 $ 2,240.00 $ 1,120.00 $ 1,120.00 12 PURCHASING AND CONTACT FOR NON-PROJECT ITEMS (WD) HOUR 32 $ 35.00 $ 1,120.00 $ 1,120.00 13 FINAL REPORT AND PRESENTATION (MILLER, KUPHAL) HOUR 8 $ 70.00 $ 560.00 $ 280.00 $ 280.00 TOTAL SUBTOTAL $ 18,540.00 $ 9,830.00 $ 8,710.00 In-Kind $ 1,120.00 Cash $ 17,420.00 $ 8,710.00 $ 8,710.00 TOTAL PROJECT TOTAL $ 29,588.00 $ 14,430.00 $ 15,072.00 Cash $ 24,980.00 $ 12,490.00 $ 12,490.00 Prepaid SWCD SCWEP ~ $ ( 35,000.00) $ ( 10,500.00) +/- ~ $( 22,510.00) $ 1,990.00 In-Kind $ 1,940.00 $ 2,582.00 TOTAL COST (In-Kind plus amount not already paid) $ 1,940.00 $ 4,572.00 Cash $ 1,990.00 In-Kind $ 1,940.00 $ 2,582.00 NEIGHBORHOOD "LAKE FRIENDLY" RECONSTUCTION RETROFIT PROGRAM SUBWATERSHED ASSESSMENT, STORMWATER EDUCATION & PREAPPROVED CLEAN WATER COST SHARE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROJECT SCOPE AND DELIVERABLES I. PROJECT PURPOSE The purpose of this project is to create and implement a preapproved water quality retrofit costs share program to residents of the 2011 and 2012 Boudins Neighborhood City Street and Utility Reconstruction Project that is targeted to improve stormwater quality and reduce the volume of runoff into Lower Prior Lake in a cost efficient manner. The City of Prior Lake (City), Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District (PLSLWD) and the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD), will partner to study the cost efficiency of a variety of stormwater retrofit options that can be installed as part of, or concurrently with, the City reconstruction project. The three organizations will then partner to implement the public involvement portion of the project to educate and identify willing landowners for water quality cost. share projects. Potential projects considered in, and resulting from this assessment and public involvement process will be installed by the City of Prior Lake or the Watershed District. Practices eligible for cost share will include curb-cut style rain gardens, pervious pavement driveways, rain leader disconnect rain gardens, and rain leader disconnection rain barrels. Other practices may be considered if determined through the assessment process to be cost competitive. II. SUBWATERSHED ASSESSMENT AND COST SHARE FORMULATION (TASK 1) The project area includes all areas tributary to the City stormwater system in the Boudins neighborhood or areas that drain directly to Lower Prior Lake from properties proposed to be assessed as part of the reconstruction project (approximately 60 acres.) Subwatershed assessment will include a cost estimation of each of the four standard practices listed above and a benefit estimation of each practice on a site by site basis. The cost and benefit models will be used to created a cost efficiency model that will be used to create a recommendation for a cost share formulation to be presented to the PLSLWD Board. A successful cost share formulation would allow residents to choose a variety of projects each with a cost share commitment that is commensurate with the modeled environmental benefits of that practice. III. EDUCATION PROGRAM AND PREAPPROVED COST SHARE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT (TASK 2) Using the approved cost share formulation, the City, PLSLWD and SWCD will create and implement a program to engage project residents using a targeted and coordinated educational effort and offering the pre-approved cost share projects. The partners will adapt social marketing approach methods that: educate residents about stormwater and its impacts to local lake water quality, enable residents to rate and understand their own personal water quality impact and recognize residents that are "Lake Friendly" through the use of yard signs, press release, or other tools. "Blue Star -Lake Friendly" recognition will also go to those residents that choose to install cost shared water quality improvements on their lots. IV. COORDINATION, BUDGET & TIMELINE Both tasks require coordination between the project partners for successful implementation. The attached schedule and budget spells out estimated time and cost commitments and who is expected to coordinate on project subtasks. The SWCD will be the project manager for this effort. The City and PLSLWD will provide in-kind time to the effort, and the SWCD is paid for its time through its existing contract with the Watershed District. Attached to this document is a project budget. While costs reflect estimated time commitments and cost-to-organization, total billed cost to the PLSLWD is significantly less because much of the time has already been paid though an existing cooperative agreement. The City and PLSLWD may also apply for state grant funding to defray some of their costs related to the program or implementation of conservation practices. The following is approximate timeline and a summary of roles and responsibilities of Task 1: November 15: Prior Lake City Council consideration November 16: Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District consideration Week of November 22: Project kickoff meeting and field reconnaissance (all) Week of November 29: BMP scoping (all) Weeks of December 6,13: Subwatershed assessment of benefit of each BMP (SWCD,City) Weeks of December 6,13: Cost assessment and design of each BMP (SWCD, City) Week of December 20: Merger of cost and benefit models (SWCD, City) Week of January 3: Cost share formulation (all) January 11: Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District consideration of preapproved cost share and funding allocation recommendation. (PLSLWD) The following is approximate timeline and a summary of roles and responsibilities of Task 2: Weeks of December 6,13,27: Develop components of education and outreach program (SWCD) Week of January 3: Finalize program components and merge with cost share formulation (all) January 11: Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District consideration of preapproved cost share and funding allocation recommendation (PLSLWD) January 12: Outreach program kickoff meeting, and presentation to residents at informational meeting (All) January 12: Mail project letter (SWCD) Weeks of January 17 through February 21: Public involvement and engagement process and coordination with City reconstruction project team (SWCD) February 28: Resident deadline for inclusion in reconstruction project related cost share BMPs. March 7: Prior Lake City Council wrap-up presentation (SWCD) March 8: Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District wrap-up presentation (SWCD) Late March-June: Contract for non-project BMPs and order recognition signs (SWCD) Late March-June: Project team coordination (SWCD, City) Task 2 will be repeated in early 2012 for the second phase of the reconstruction The SWCD will appoint a project manager to lead this effort. The project manager will coordinate closely with City Engineering staff and the PLSLWD to insure project deliverables are timely and complete. V. DELIVERABLES Task 1: Project management and final report outlining recommendations for cost share practices. Task 2: Project management, program related education materials and recognition signs, coordination with City and WD staff that will build or contract to build cost share practices, and final report presentation. VII. PARTNERSHIP SUMMARY SSWCD Provides: Project planning and coordination Technical assistance for mapping and assessment Other technical services as needed Education and Outreach Contract administration City of Prior Lake Provides: Technical expertise on BMPs and cost assessments Project concept design and management Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District provide: Coordination with project partners i � � 1 � : s � . � . - • - - • • � � • - - • • t - • • - - • • - • ' • - C• � • •� •�• � �!�• � � � . ,, � ,�' , , �� �� � 4 � s ' �I,> ��_��- .I� I / ,� �� , � � i ]� ! a ` _ - � � ���������/� �����_ // I � ' - ,�� � '� .. _ • , . V► . � :l' _.. a_ lr _ � ' �� �� -- == ���:�- i' : � � � 1 �i . ► � � � � _ .. . 1r ,� �. 5�,�,1/� -_.�:.�:��—��� � - , • ..� � �..� / � �,,i=� � ._, �� ��;. �.- I • .; 1:�■■ 1►1a1I�� m � t' ' ���,����'i� �'1�1� m 1, 1 ri�i��������f!/���� _. r/ 1/.r/� ..�► _� ' �� � + ` ' ' ' � ' - ' �j�� � � � �� it► ' . ;' � r m y��i � � ;� � � . m�►► � � _ .. ������/ , � , � � ` �� - -- � �� m , �. � � �.�i����i/��� � a� t � �, � iii � + � ' ���.�� ` f � J ��Lll'�� m r =� �� , • ` �� % / � � � � �� ri � >l� .�Ji'r �/s� __�! � ✓ . , m �� .� � � �� E���."�!� -: � �'��,�!�!� 1 �,�,: � ,�� � �� � „,�.�J��!.��" : ,`1,���'J � . ��� � fi � � � .. �. �-�'�-�_�� __�� ° � r_ . � � I �r • � �� � . � � � :/ � � � - r '�' .�- �em.n,a�a .+�.. �:e�. ���s�€�` � .�.�u� �.. ����� f �. .. ' t ! �al / :.I�1 �i � ��i ' if aa "�' :� / � _�'�.��.�1 �'fi�l�i .!j�t.�l., � �"� :� � � � � ,� �� �� -- ��t��i _ - ,- ' - � .� � � .,� � � � x< a 1 ' � / f -� �n j ' !� � �� � " �� � ���.Ti �� ��: � s �� J: �y`}� ���� `� #� � � ���: q.�. ♦.�. � �`���� .�,�" � '` .. .�`-._.k,... t s--.. ��.r�r� � ;> �.��. . ` .. � �� � � t��� , r ,_,_...°- i � y � R �� j - ` $� � _ �� �th �����' F � ��� j .�����������,. .,. *�es �. ���� .,���`F �..: � � P -� �P Wa>-;{ �.< ,-3z3 � . � .. � y �-� -� E C�,. `� T� i8 L t � d y�2 �- ��j�, � � + . � � �� � � —i`� � � �' � .� �� ' � `� �.;�� . � r f �,: � � - ".�'� ��"". -� ..' f.. 3� � � � � �.�„ �i �. _ $ . �" � �'� �f������. -_��,s� �° . '� ,� a �> � . .' ;� ,: "_r�- . . � � �r _.� " . . ,. �� �. �� . '-. . . .� ;' �- „ � � � � � . . . � . � .- -. .... . . •- . .• -. • . • . :. . . .. ... 0 :' / ���� � ��."- �►'li �_ _�,��i���!!!!I/,�1� , �� � . :.,- ; ���,: � ��r7 ��''` . � %� !������ a . �E��� � .. _ � �,�.�����► .�'n►%. �� .� ` � � �� l� r�,�-�=-�--��/l��y� � � �I�i� �,- t, ,� � x: . .. ��s���- — - � � � � � s ���r. .�,.. �:.�':!!1�!Ii�J�'I ;..�i� ..L-,_ ,:.�� - , _ � . . ,--� . . :�. "'�}�r�J',.� l3��t�.`� - ._. ,� �' ��l�'�'...�.� � .-�.*�'�'�i ,: . =.� �'� � .�� �� . '�SI� � ��I�•Z�II�:����� ���i � � � ' �� - �- . 1 ,- � ��� ���I����w��/�'1/ii • ��� �.�: � �'�l� m� � ► �ll �'���.� .� (�� l����'�1.�'' �� �►� m�" � • c! � . ��!'/i �'��� - F� • �' � m - � C���!�i. i .� . , . �.. �. �� � ir � . � :., � /�,� : . .:7 :' 1 .�r � �� m ` r � � -I ' / � � ' ,� � f/ . � . I���YL:�/ � �, '/� . L m A �� _ .�.�. � . ,. _ �_� tl�.� m � - r,,���'.��� _ - ■ - � p�l� m . . ��` , l, . ;' , , m � . ff . _ �' � .� . ��.�-' m ,. � � ���f�� _ - �= �/�� m�r � . . . rA ��! �: .,.���■ , ;.��, y ��� m _ _r_-�� _,, � � ��y .� � �, .. , . � �. �� m�� -1` �:�t� �i ��/, ,.�: �!% � ' ������ .� m �., �� � � �. �: _. , . � m _[t"!�: ' %-�!,��. . , �� ,,- �l� m�� � � . - �- � � �l�� �� - '�,'�J �a��11l: m . - � � L! ,�,, � �l1�..,�_ ._�.�, _� t�►J.�.i! m • - ���l�l�1,�� � �► ��..��� �II�'t _ � � �i� � ' ! :-1 � � . ,�li: .. �: , c� �' ., � . � m � ��AI.1_� ' . �.c� . r , , _ �I�t a� ' � �'�7 • .- ��►� ,_T.�.:�_ �•� ��. � ► � , m , � — ���' �-%1-- �����i� � . �h��� m � , , , � , � > � /�'�1 - �J�'�!� m �1 � � .. °�/,r��I��=-� '�� • + � � m ►;. � ��:�Z� fl!1 ��!�..,► =�' ► ' �S ' m � ' �'► � ' �.� � � BOUDINS MANOR STREET``RECC�NSTRUCTION We, the undersigned, oppose the street reconstruction being considered by the City of Prior Lake in the Baudins Manor neighborhood. # NAME SIGNATURE ADDRE5S DATE 1 � '� (� - � �� _ 2 ,� , /� � u� � _ ^ a 3 ' � � -`. .%� - /�. 4 ���� � i (�7��J'�Ow, ;�. 'l" L-� t( 5 � � a - - �`l�i / � :6d'zl Bo�.� �, S� �1E !? -IY-I� 7 � - , � : �!o D��� � �- l����� ��� � ' �.�n;e! $ -r�� 7G� - fi� �,� ! �' � � � � �. g � � �` ��'�� v��C� g� �1-�� � � �o � - � � ,�;�r� �' �� ��d ��c� �1���� � � �� � 12 13 1� 3.5 � 15 . ' � 7 ' 1.8 � � 21 � � � ' 24 � 25 u ; 27 ,� � . <.:-. �� 28 �� � � � ��� � � x , :�; � � �; - � � ��� � 29 _ _ .; ., � 31 32 33 . 34 35 �"' BOUDINS MANOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION We, the undersigned, oppose the street reconstruction being considered by the City of Prior Lake in the Boudins Manor neighborhood. # NAME SIGNATURE:•�'" ADDRESS DATE 1 � ��„ - � �; l' /Z -/� 2 S U -/� � 3 B GL �LG�rv r�� PXdU �S•z3 ��d / .S' ��/8 /6 4 ,� 19 �LG ` � d�.� Bv �v s'r- i/ i.��0 5 �1 �- ���-tl iv' � �c uDi r vs 9�R LOT � 7�"' WC"T�� l� 3 id 6 ' � - �- �� - , I 7 ':_ � ' �� � �t {-e.�-�cl- ' �� N �, IC f5 � 8 � � " j` '�i��' �or'�r �"�. � <� 1�/a 9 i k' �� l � S S_ d 10 11 • 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 - 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 . 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 � �aH ( S ���haw�.,, I cnme as a representative af the citizens in the Boudins Manar neighbarhood. A petition abaut 1 year aga asked peaple if they wanted the roads in this neighbarhood fixed, and did not address the $8,000-10,000 assessment that cames with the signature. Many signers were unaware af the assessment that they were in effect asking far with this accelerated schedule. I think the cauncil currently feels that the residents are in suppart of the raad recanstructian plan as propased. The petitian 1 have apposing this project has been signed by �3 � peaple, which is over half af the peaple affected. There have been a variety af reasons for the appasition that I have heard. 1. Cast -$82�0 is a huge bill for many in this ecor►omy. Fixed i»came people get na COLA this year. 2. Lack of maintenance — In my 1G years as a resident 1 have seen inadequate patching dane. Many times hales are patched but adjaining hales are nat. I grew up in Burnsville, on a 1965 street is sea) caated e�ery 5-7 years and does nat yet need repair. I guess 1 liken that ta painting patches an a waod sided house. Haw well wauld that work after 30 years, campared to a cample#e paint job. 3. Sidewalks — Low traffic neighbarhaod, peaple da not feel that the sidewalks are necessary. 4. Speed — We have discussed high speed on these streets far years with P.D. The chief has tald us that he can't enforce the speed limit an these small streets. Curbs and a new surface will have people driving faster yet. 5. The harrible disruption that will accur over a whale 5 manths af recanstruetian. 6. Curb design — surmauntable vs. insurmountable. ?. Sewer replacement in anly part af the neighborhaad. Why not all if yau apening the street. S. Raad height — The unanswered questians abaut the change in elevatian fram the current state. Larry's answer that "we will raise it as much as we can" leaves a lot missing. 9. The potential problem af different assessments far each neighbarhood could lead to litigatian. The 2011 praject assessment will be certified prior ta bids being let far the 2012 praject, yet residents are pramised the assessments will be the same for bath prajects 10. Tatal # of units seems misleading. The hard to read map shows 132, Larry stated 152, but was tatally unaware of the apartment building invalved in the praject. If the number is anly 132, the assessment will be much higher than the currently prajected $8200. My taxes tripled in 3 years for a vacant lot. I recei�e no city services far that lat. Naw yau are asking me to pay $8200 in additian ta the regular taxes that have tripled for a vacant {at. The Oakland Beach neighbarhood received an averlay with no assessment. Perhaps that cauld be laoked at here.