My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-25-1998 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
11-25-1998 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2012 10:36:04 AM
Creation date
9/5/2012 10:32:41 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
112
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
evaluated as part of final design, but we want to ensure adequate capacity during heavy <br />rainfall events to prevent localized flooding. <br />A question was raised about senior deferred assessments. The City Administrator explained <br />that it was an option for qualified property owners. He pointed out that interest does <br />continue to accrue at the stated rate during the time of deferral. <br />The City Administrator also pointed out that assessment interest is not deductible. He stated <br />that some property owners have paid for their assessment by utilizing a home equity loan <br />whereby they can gain deductibility of interest subject to their individual tax situations. He <br />emphasized that each property owner should consult their tax advisor before undertaking this <br />option. <br />The seed versus sod option was discussed in greater detail. It was pointed out that by <br />seeding the boulevards, there may be opportunities for cost savings which could be passed on <br />to the residents. This would be something that could be bid as an alternate and then offer <br />that choice to the residents before proceeding with construction. The pros and cons of each <br />option were discussed. <br />Joe Kausner asked if $45 per lineal foot was the maximum assessment. The City Engineer <br />answered that it is the maximum assessment and the possibility exists that the actual amount <br />could be less. <br />Joe Donovan indicated that he had talked with Greg Deeb and Terry Schmidt. Neither of <br />those parties wants a new street installed. Mr. Donovan also indicated that those present this <br />evening do not want a new street installed given the high cost. They feel that they will not <br />reap the full benefits of the street because they will likely not be in their residences over that <br />period of time. <br />Mr. Donovan stated that Little Canada Road was overlaid and wondered why that option <br />could not be used on East Brooks Avenue. The City Administrator pointed out that Little <br />Canada Road was overlaid by Ramsey County as an offset to ongoing maintenance until that <br />road is reconstructed. It is a band -aid solution and one that will not add any significant life <br />to that road section. In the case of East Brooks Avenue, it would be a significant waste of <br />money to put blacktop down over the current road surface. <br />A question was raised as to why East Brooks Avenue was not sealcoated this past summer <br />with other streets in the neighborhood. The City Engineer explained that a sealcoat would <br />not have helped the street at all and would have been a waste of City resources. The current <br />condition of East Brooks Avenue necessitates reconstruction. <br />The residents asked if they could petition the Council to not install curb and gutter and/or not <br />proceed with the project. The City Administrator said that was an option they could utilize <br />and that the final decision is the Council's. However, he noted that in this case, City staff <br />will be recommending that we proceed with reconstruction of the street given its deteriorated <br />Page 71 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.