My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-16-2002 Council Special Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
01-16-2002 Council Special Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:05:13 PM
Creation date
7/23/2008 2:04:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTF,S <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JANUARY 16, 2002 <br />The City Administrator reported that the City will have to obtain permits from <br />the Watershed, and will work with them as the design for the project is <br />developed. <br />Mrs. Hartigan felt that the curbing will have a drastic effect on the wetland <br />area. She agreed that water main is needed as well as the road improvement. <br />However, she was opposed to curb and gutter. Mrs. Hartigan asked why there <br />is no curb and gutter on McMenemy Road. <br />The City Administrator reported that when McMenemy Road was improved it <br />was acold-in-place recycling project, and not a complete reconstruction. At <br />the time a full reconstruction project is done, curb and gutter would be added. <br />Mrs. Tesch, Sextant Avenue, was concerned about the financial impact that the <br />project would have on her family. <br />Montour pointed out that the City caps the residential assessment rate and <br />equalizes it for all residential street improvement projects in the City. <br />Mr. Hartigan asked how the assessment was arrived at for his two lots. The <br />City Engineer explained the odd-lot formula in the City's assessment policy. <br />Mrs. Hartigan again stated that the water main and street reconstruction are <br />needed, but it was her feeling that curb and gutter were not. Again she was <br />concerned about impact on the wetland. <br />There was no one else present from the general public wishing to comment on <br />this matter. <br />Upon motion by LaValle, seconded by Scalze, the public hearing was closed. <br />Mrs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION 2002-I-13 -ORDERING IMPROVEMENT NO. 2000-17, <br />SEXTANT AVENUE, AS WELL AS PREPARATION OF PLANS <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Montour. <br />Ayes (5) Scalze, LaValle, Montour, Anderson, Fahey. <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />The City Administrator reported that once plans and specs are prepared, the <br />property owners will be invited in to review them so that any specific issues <br />such as Mr. Skipon's driveway access, can be addressed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.