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