My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-04-84 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1980's
>
1984
>
09-04-84 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 8:08:40 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:03:30 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 9-4-84 PAGE 7 <br />Pursuant to published notice, the public hearing for the 1983 and 1984 <br />Sealcoating was opened at 8:50 p.m. in the council chambers. <br />The City Engineer reviewed the program that was adopted in 1983 <br />whereby every City street would be sealcoated once every six years. <br />Bohrer stated that the 20% of this construction charge that is being <br />assessed to the property owners on the streets that were sealcoated is <br />the minimum amount that the City can assess. The total amount to be <br />assessed for these two projects is $19,800. Bohrer pointed out that <br />the total amount of the 1983 and 1984 Sealcoating projects was <br />considerably less than estimated as the City was able to get this work <br />done by the County as they did the Sealcoating of the County Roads, <br />rather than contracting the work out to a private contractor. <br />The proposed method of assessment is the unit charge method. The <br />number of assessable lots or parcels which abut the sealcoated streets <br />is 762 which results in a cost per lot or parcel of $25.98. If the <br />City Council takes action on this proposed assessment at this meeting, <br />there will be a thirty day period in which that amount can be paid up <br />with no interest cost. If it is not paid up within thirty days, it is <br />proposed that it be assessed over one year at a 10% interest charge. <br />John Leslie, 20th Street North stated that it would have been smart to <br />patch the soft holes on 20th Street North before it was sealcoated. <br />The Engineer indicated that the maintenance crew did spend some time <br />on 20th Street. However, 20th Street is at the point where pretty <br />soon that street is going to have to be reconstructed. It is a <br />Municipal State Aide Street, but it is not in the immediate program. <br />If it continues to deteriorate, plans may have to be changed and the <br />street reconstructed in certain areas sooner than anticipated <br />Wyn John pointed out that there were some parcels on Jane Road North <br />that were unadvertently put on this assessment role. <br />Joseph Timmers objected to the amount of taxes that he pays. <br />John Leslie, 20th Street North stated that at the time 20th Street was <br />surfaced the agreement was reached if the property owners paid for the <br />surfacing, the City would maintain the road thereafter. He asked if <br />that agreement was binding. <br />Eder stated that would be the standard statement that would be made in <br />terms of if the street is improved it will be then subject to City <br />improvements. What is being proposed here is the uniform treatment <br />throughout the City so that it would not, in effect, violate that <br />generalized statement. That means if it is a public street maintained <br />or accepted by the City, the City will maintain it, as long as they <br />can do so. <br />Mr. Leslie stated his second point was that he has requested the <br />County combine his property all under one parcel. The notice that he <br />was sent for this public hearing indicated that this change had not <br />been made and he would be charged for three parcels. Mr. Leslie was <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.