Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br />. <br />.e <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />.e <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />.e <br />. <br /> <br />Arden Hills Council <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />May 23, 1994 <br /> <br />Mayor Sather said that he agreed with the comments <br />previously made by Councilmembers. Sather indicated that <br />he would support keeping these streets, (including the <br />Dunlap Street project), in the Pavement Management <br />Project for 1994. He believed that this has a positive <br />effect on a neighborhood. The Mayor gave as an example <br />work previously done on another section of Dunlap. The <br />neighbors at this location improved their landscaping <br />after the street project was completed. The result was a <br />neighborhood that has an upgraded and positive look. <br /> <br />According to the assessment policy, if residents want to <br />do street improvements in the future, they can bring to <br />the Council a petition of 100% of the residents. That <br />action would insure that they pay all of the costs of <br />any improvement, instead of the 50% assessment charged <br />currently. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Probst moved, seconded by Hicks, to include Dunlap <br />Street in the 1994 Pavement Management Project. <br /> <br />Council asked if Dunlap Street was removed from the <br />project, would there be an increase in charges and cost. <br />Engineer Maurer indicated that there are overhead costs <br />to take into account, no matter how big or small a <br />project. It would not be expected to be drastically <br />different if Dunlap Street alone is taken out. Attorney <br />Filla indicated that the contractor has the right to <br />change these overhead costs and charges if it is rebid. <br />Councilmember Probst indicated that there would have to <br />be additional time allowed to hold a project hearing and <br />assessment hearing in order to follow through the <br />procedure, if Dunlap was removed. <br /> <br />The Mayor called for a vote on the motion. Motion <br />carried unanimously (5-0). <br />