Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 24, 1995 <br />objected. The property owners only wanted a new road <br />surface, but the Council felt the road needed to be <br />brought up to City standards. The original numbers to <br />do that were approximately $72 per front foot. Now, <br />two years later, the cost is $35 per front foot. Nagle <br />pointed out that 2 1/2 years ago, the property owners <br />asked for $35 per front foot. The concern is with the <br />process of how the estimate got conveyed to the City. <br />Nagle pointed out that Mr. and Mrs. McDonough are <br />concerned that given the notice they received on the <br />amount of their proposed assessment, there was no way <br />they could know how much footage they were being <br />assessed for. They had to learn from a neighbor the <br />cost being assessed per front foot and divide that <br />number by their total assessment amount. Nagle asked <br />that the City tell the property owners what is really <br />going on feeling that this would cause less confusion. <br />Nagle asked for the real information up-front. <br />Nagle pointed out that when the Council ordered the <br />improvement, the property owners have to then find out <br />what it will cost later. This is the situation the <br />McDonough's find themselves in. <br />Nagle reported that the property owners along Lake <br />Street asked for the type of curbing that was put in <br />rather than the drive-over curb. <br />Nagle reported that there was never any discussion, <br />verbal or in writing, that the assessment would be <br />levied before the completion of the project. The <br />property owners had no clue that the project would not <br />be finished until next summer, and the assessment would <br />be levied prior to completion. Nagle felt there was a <br />lack of communication. <br />Nagle noted that the contract calls for a 30-day <br />construction period per street segment. Lake Street <br />was begun the third week in May and the contractor was <br />still working on it the third week in September. Nagle <br />noted that the penalty clause in the contract calls for <br />a$400 per day penalty be imposed for not meeting the <br />completion date provided for in the contract. <br />Fahey stated that the property owners can assume that <br />the City will go after the contractor for whatever <br />liquidated damages it feels appropriate. Fahey stated <br />that it was his view that any liquidated damages <br />collected be returned to the property owners subject to <br />the expenses it took to recover those damages. <br />22 <br />