02-11-1997 Charter Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

JOINT CHARTER COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 1997 specifications would be prepared and advertisement for bids ordered. The Council would then accept bids and hold an assessment hearing with the start of the project in the Spring of 1998 with substantial completion in the Fall of 1998 and the final course laid in the Spring of 1999. He explained why it may be better to hold the public hearing prior to the start of construction in case there are objections and/or appeals. Commissioner Solfest noted some of the properties do not have sewer and water utilities. Mr. Ahrens explained they did not consider utilities but he would recommend those utilities be installed prior to constructing the street. He stated he will have to research what those costs would be. Commissioner Solfest inquired regarding the City burden in general and possible increase to the property owner's tax bill. Council Member Bergeson noted the City only receives about 24% of the total tax bill. Chair Montain asked if any group of property owners have expressed interest in roadway improvements. Mr. Ahrens advised there may have been several calls of inquiry but no direct request for road improvements. Chair Montain asked if additional roadway phases will contain similar costs, or be reduced somewhat. Mr. Horn explained the first five phases include streets in the worst condition so the next phases will not include such extensive work. Thus, the cost may be lower, unless the work is not completed in the near future and the roads have deteriorated to the point of those in the first five phases. Mr. Ahrens concurred that the streets within the first five phases require complete reconstruction but doing an overlay now to some of the streets included in future phases would greatly extend the life of those roadways. Council Member Lyden asked of an overlay is a maintenance item, or a construction item. Mr. Ahrens stated he considers it to be a maintenance item since it does not involve tearing out and replacing materials. Mr. Hawkins stated at this point, it really makes no difference since the work still needs to be paid for. Council Member Lyden inquired regarding the budget impact. Mr. Ahrens estimated $110,000 per mile of overlay which could result in a substantial impact. He advised that some cities assess for this type of work. Mr. Hawkins agreed this type of work can be assessed to benefiting property owners or general fund dollars can be used. However, if assessed, residents have the right to petition against the project. Council Member Lyden suggested the status of MSA be considered separately (Ware Road) and MSA roadways be removed from consideration in the phases. PAGE 3