CCMin_92Nov25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

,-, MINUTES ' ~ NOVEMBER 25, 1992 PAGE 4 Wes Tennyson, 1935 Summer, stated he had been responsible for the petition on his street and that 85~ of those indicated opposition due to cost, concrete curb and gutter which will change the character of the neighborhood and the fact that they were already assessed for storm sewer approximately 10 years ago. They also questioned whether or not the assessment is fair and equitable because the neighbors to the south will benefit as much as those in the assessment area. Baldwin indicated the engineer will prepare a written response to questions brought forth at this meeting. Maurer stated that some who have been assessed for storm drainage to the south will not be assessed again. Judy McCleery, 1918 Autumn, asked who will fund repair of yards, sprinkler systems and driveways disrupted during construction. Maurer replied that the construction contract will include aprons and sodding. The contract will also require avoiding fences and sprinklers if at all possible, but if necessary they will be taken out and replaced. Karen Northrup, 1942 Summer, commented on the unusual usage of the streets, i.e., use of their streets by trucks during construction of the homes to the south which added to wear. Baldwin explained that the action being considered at this meeting is acceptance of the feasibility but does not commit to the project or assessment roll. He stressed that there will be another opportunity to discuss the project, the city is not committed until a bid is accepted. Peter Olein asked what chance there was to challenge the engineering to which Maurer replied there will be a public hearing in February and plans will be 85~ completed by that time and that information will be shared with the residents. Gehrz requested discussion of sidewalk construction in the University Grove area as it is being considered a part of the 1993 improvement project including the assessment. She questioned the cost,if criteria would be established to require replacement such as safety hazards, if individual homeowners would have the option whether or not to reconstruct and to obtain separate bids for the sidewalk abutting their property if so desired. Maurer explained that all sidewalks are in the feasibility, but it has not been determined which need repair. A brief discussion ensued regarding the need for consistency and the convenience of having it all done during the street construction.