Laserfiche WebLink
r:rTriu~rrs <br />cicy coun~~l <br />n~~. ~.~~, :~n~;4 <br />L~ittle Cana~:la >L~. ~del.tzin st~ited thaC Cent_erville Road is a County Roael and Che <br />12oad Rrid„e CounCy ~i_s ~zs,~rnano that the *.aoel< on thi.s road tai].1. i~e el.ig~i.ble for <br />(Cont.) County Statc Ai.d funds. ',Jelt:zin stat_ed Ch~at ~iS Chi.s work is noC <br /> eli.~;ible for ~itate Ai.d funds, there ~s~i;Lt be a Prohlem ein~~ d~itferent <br /> ~[unding wi.11 have Co b~ wori<ed oaC. <br />Wel.tzi.n reporCed t1~iaC the storm setioer plan wil.l. be sent to tne <br />>taCe and they cv~i.11 te11 t~ie Coi,inty Low rnuch gu, t~x motle~y t:he <br />County can use on thts projecC. The balance wi.l.l have t:o be <br />assessed. T,JeLtzl.n stated thr~il r;i_ghC now tl:~e County does not.l<nom <br />ho~o much of the project *oi.11 be coverect ~a1.Ch CounCy SCate Flid Punds. <br />Mrs. Sca7.ze stated that ,tor,!n sewer ~~~roject_s aee &ssessed to the <br />peo}~l.e ~oho drain i_nto t;~e ,COrin sewer.. Scalze as1cFC1 c~Pio the C1.ty <br />cooi.i'I.d as ess i_n t:hi.s case. T1r. ~Iel.tzin rt~pl.i.ed thet he does not: <br />Icno~x ttxis ans*.acr, and pointed out t?lat Che Cit~ i.s bein}; treated zis <br />Che Count,y trea~s all othex~ cie~ies. <br />>1rs. Scai1.ze aslced wl~~at: wt~uld hnppeii if. the Ci.ty fel.t [Ii~t ~~(^1 1)Q'L' <br />shoulel be assessec3 For the storm sec•ier. <br />Nlr. ~ael.Czi.i1 stated that when a State Ai.d Fiiql~~.~ay is r~econstructed, <br />tP~e*, Coimt,y u;es Che. money Ghat ~ s e1i_gi o1e. 1\nyth~in~; E l;e ~.i.s a <br />1oca1 efFort, This is the County's pol.i.cy and t_he Coi,~nty mu,t be <br />consis;t.ent in iCS aopl~icut9_on oP thc pol.icy. <br />I~ra~~ltzi.n al.so staCed tli2t tl~e County does not Cel.l t:lie City k~ow i.C <br />must: nay for i.t, share, that i.s t;i City deci.sion. <br />Mr. T'zihey asked what ~~rould happezi if thc- City says i.t cloes not 7.i1ce <br />the Oounty's G~olicy. l~~liey sCated, that if rhe c~i.Cy Cre<~ted C1n.s 1i.ke <br /><+ny other grojecC, could it zisse,s p~rt of the cost b~ick against the <br />Count.y. <br />n[r. 47eltztin sLated thc~t the Count~~ would atready be p~yi.n~; 7S% i.n <br />itat:e Ai.d ancl could not be assessed Furt.her. <br />i~1r. ifanson :f.el.t Chat Chi.s pr.oject ~,aould heve to ~o general. o611gaC~ion <br />6ec~ii.ise tl~u-~ assessment would be to great for. tl~ie adjacent property <br />owners. <br />Mrs. ilardin~i pointed out thaC 8,000 cFies arc projecCed for thi.s <br />bri.d~e~ and the Ci.tq cloes not even he.ive 8,000 people. <br />Che lin~i.neer stated Chat h<-~ li.lced ti~~e idea of assessing front f.oot.age <br />and T>ointed out that. curh and gutLe,r ~ooi.il.d be U~e main porttion of tPie <br />a sessmenC and the sCOrm sewe~r is5essmenG woald be inci.dental.. <br />?rs, Scal.ze stated thaC ic is not t:he fau7.t of tl~e neighbors ehat <br />there. is a bridge over an i.nterstate in tFieir area ~hnt i.s col7.ecCing <br />water and runn~in~; ,i.t on tl~ieir pi-onertq> <br />Pa~e -8- <br />