5 Safety Improv to Highway 101
5
-
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
-
DATE:
RESOLUTION NO:
MOTION BY:
SECONDED BY:
A RESOLUTION COMMUNICATING A DESIRE FOR SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS TO
STATE HIGHWAY 101 BETWEEN WEST 78m STREET AND TOWNLINE ROAD
WHEREAS, the City ofChanhassen working in conjunction with the City of Eden Prairie,
Carver County, Hennepin County and the State Department of Transportation has sought for an
extended period oftime a resolution to the turn back proposal propered by the State Department of
Transportation; and
WHEREAS, these extensive negotiations have resulted in an impasse; and
WHEREAS, the parties involved in the discussion have been unable to reach an agreement
as to the improvements to be made to State Highway 101; and
WHEREAS, the State Department of Transportation communicated, in a letter dated
September 12, 2000 to Representative Tom Workman, its desire to resume jurisdiction and
maintenance of this segment of Hwy. 101; and
WHEREAS, State Highway 101 remains in need of several minor safety improvements;
and
WHEREAS, the State Department of Transportation is entrusted with ensuring the safety
of motorists and pedestrians alike on its highway system;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Chanhassen that it communicate its
strong desire to the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the installation of traffic signals at
Valley View Road and Pleasant View Road intersections of Highway 101, minor shouldering
improvements up and down the length of Highway 101, and a resurfacing of Highway 101 nom
West 78th Street to Townline Road.
Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this day of
,2000.
ATTEST:
Nancy K. Mancino, Mayor
Scott A. Botcher, City Manager
YES
NO
ABSENT
g:\admin\resol\hwy I 0 I improve.doc
(a) By perpetrator. Any person applying graffiti on public or private property has the
duty to remove the graffiti within 24 hours after notice by the city or private owner of the
property involved. This removal must be done in a manner prescribed by the city manager, chief
of police, city engineer or their designees. Any person applying graffiti is responsible for the
removal or for the payment of the removal. Failure of any person to remove graffiti or pay for
the removal will constitute an additional violation of this article. Where graffiti is applied by a
person underl8 years old, the parents or legal guardian will also be responsible for such removal
or for the payment for the removal.
Section 13-41. Removal of Graffiti.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _ day of
of the City ofChanhassen.
, 2000 by the City Council
(b) By property owner or city. If graffiti is not removed by the perpetrator according to
paragraph 1, the city may order that the graffiti be removed by the property owner or any person
who may be in possession or who has the right to possess such property, pursuant to the nuisance
abatement procedure in city code section 13-4. If the property owner or responsible party fails to
remove offending graffiti within the time specified by the city, the city may commence
abatement and cost recovery proceedings for the graffiti removal in accordance with city code
section 13-4.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
By:
Nancy K. Mancino, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Scott A. Botcher, ClerklManager
(Published in the Chanhassen Villager on
, 2000.)
89560
3
Oct-IS-OO 03:16P Latus Realty
P.OI
/-¡ /'
'- ,
vlotkq
October 18, 2000
TO:
Scott Botcher
BY FAX 937-5739
FROM:
VemelJe Clayton
RE:
Proposed <n-affiti Ordinance
Thanks for dropping in at the meeting this morning. While we did not discuss the proposed
ordinance nom the perspective of passing an actual resolution at this time, the general consensus
seemed to be that it is a worthwhile pursuit and we have forwarded the document to the
Governmental Affairs Committee.
Since we had a brief discussion with you regarding a 24 hour period for owners to remove the
graffiti--l note that the 24 hours relates to the perpetrators, not to the building owners, so it
would seem that the concerns we discussed are mute. Presumably the City would take into
consideration the extent of the graffiti, when setting its time limits for owners so that in the event
the damage were sufficiently severe so as to warrant submitting an insurance claim, time for that
process would be permitted
I do have one observation as to the language and requirements of Section 13-41 (a). The
proposed language deals only with "removal" of the graffiti. It occurs to me that, for example, if
the graffiti were in the fonn of an "etching", removal may not be possible. Thus, it would seem
there should be a provision requiring the "perps" to repair or replace damaged materials as well.