08-10-88 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MznurEs City Council August 10, 1988 Carla Lane Fahey asked the feelings of the Carla Lane r~esidents with r•egar•d to Impr•ovements the water~main i mpr~ovement a nd str•eet reconstr•uction versus 2 inch (Cont.) overlay. Fahey pointed out that if the majority of residents would like water~main impr~ovement, the matter• could be tabled until spring when Maplewood acts on the Palm Cour~t water•main petition. Fahey asked how many residents wer•e in favor of water•main impr~ovement and street reconstr•uction. 4 Car~la Lane pr•oper~ty owner~s r•aised their• hands indicating that they were in favor~ of this impr•ovement. Fahey asked how many r•esidents wer~e interested in only the over•lay of Car•la Lane with 2 inches of bituminous and some bituminous curbing. There wer•e 14 pr•operty owner•s r~aising their~ hands indicating that they wer~e in favor of this impr•ovement. Blesener• indicated that the City received a letter• fr•om another Car•la Lane proper~ty owner• which indicated that she was in favor• of the 2-inch over•lay at this time, br~inginq the total to 15 pr~oper~ty owner•s i n favor. The City Cler•k repor•ted that assessments for~ water•main and str~eet reconstruction would have been spr~ead over• a 10 year~ per•iod at an i nter~est r~ate of 9 to 10%. Assessments for• an over•1 ay only coul d be spread out over~ a 5 year• per•iod at the same inter~est rate, which is what has been done in other~ over•lay improvements in the City. Mr•. Btesener introduced the following r•esolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. 88-8-320 - CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CARLA LANE IP9PROVEMENT PETITION The for~egoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Fahey. Ayes (5) Blesener•, Fahey, Collova, LaVa11e, Scalze. Nays (0). Resolution declar~ed adopted. This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 20, Page 326. One pr•oper~ty owner• i ndicated that hi s house i s on the corner~ of Car•1 a Lane and Keller• Par~kway and asked if the curbing could be extended around his pr•operty fronting on Keller~ Parkway. The City Engineer~ pointed out that Keller Par•kway is a County r~oad, however, felt a per•mit could be obtained for• extension of the cur~bing. Mr•. Vitale asked if the over•lay would be done this year. The Engineer replied that that was possible. A pr•oper•ty owner~ asked if the assessment was calculated on a per~ lot basis or• a front foot basis. The Engineer• replied that the assessment was on a per• lot basis pointing Page -3-