Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />September 27, 1989 <br />Council disagreed with this suggestion. <br />Dr. Nakay, 3000 Payne Avenue, felt that property owners <br />on adjacent streets had just as much use of Payne <br />Avenue as the residents on Payne. Nakay felt that <br />these property owners should share in the cost of the <br />improvement. <br />Blesener pointed out that this is built into the 80/20 <br />assessment cost. Adjacent property owners are assessed <br />80% of the cost of an improvement, and the 20% o£ the <br />cost put on general taxation covers the use that others <br />make of a street. <br />Dean Paisley, Payne Avenue resident, submitted his <br />formal objection to the assessment of 80% of the cost <br />of Imp. No. 88-7. <br />A property owner reported that some of the curbing on <br />Payne Avenue is in need of repair, and asked if it <br />would be replaced as part of the project. <br />The City Engineer replied that it would. <br />Bendel asked how many years the assessment would be <br />spread out over. <br />The City Engineer suggested that the assessment could <br />be spread out over 10 to 12 years. <br />Fahey pointed out that residents also have the option <br />of paying the assessment prior to its certification at <br />the County, thus avoiding interest costs. <br />Rita Mills, 2979 Payne Avenue, reported that there are <br />two areas south of Allen that are broken up, and asked <br />if these would be reconstructed. <br />The City Engineer replied that these spots would be cut <br />out and patched and overlaid. <br />A resident asked how many bids the City would <br />anticipate receiving for the improvement. <br />Blesener reported that sealed bids would be taken and <br />the City generally receives 9 to 10 bids on such <br />projects. Council indicated that it will notify the <br />spokesmen for the Payne Avenue residents at the time <br />the Council considers the bids. <br />Page 24 <br />