res_6782 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

5 MR. GERALD J. MANGLE, 637 Iona Lane: I don't know whether to speak for or against the project. I think I will hold that until I get some answers to some questions that I have. Number 1, it was stated that a petition was circulated which 70% of the people in the affected area signed positively. I doubt that a petition was circulated that included the sewer assessment area because I know of no petition that ever came on the west side of Dale Street. MR. HONCHELL: The petition I spoke of as being 70% signed, as I indicated with the pointer, was for the roadway improvement and affected people abutting Iona only, not the entire storm sewer area. Those people, to the best of my knowledge, were not contacted pro or con as far as the petition. MR. MANGLE: So as far as we're concerned this is the first that we have heard of it - "we" being the people on the west side of Dale Street living on Iona Lane. Second point - the reason that was stated for this sewer was to make the street last longer and provide a good investment. I understand this as far as Dale is concerned, but in our portion of Iona Lane there is no sewer going in. Therefore, it's not going to make our portion last one bit longer. The water is still going to run down that street regardless - there are no catch basins or any of that kind of thing in the street to pick up the water so as far as our benefit of the street lasting longer, I don't see that point at all from our point of view. The third point that I would like to make is that when we bought and paid for our houses, the decision was made at that point in time that we did not need a sewer because the topo is such that the water will drain naturally and I suppose that's why so much emphasis was put on the installation of gutter and service road and the like. Therefore, what we have now is an improvement coming up - in any case - 12 years later and I think that's about the ballpark that most of us have been there. We have something coming in that we're going to have to pay for if this is approved or not modified in any way and I think if you would poll all the people on our side of the street, when they bought their homes a clause was put in the earnest money contract that said all the improvements would be in and paid for by the contractor. As a mat~r of fact, I'm positive the contractor was required to put the improvements in and it was reflected in the cost of the homes. Therefore, I think we have in effect, through the purchase of our homes, paid for this, for our portion anyhow, at that point in time. I rather doubt that 12 years later you can come back to your contractor and say we had this in our earnest money contract. I would guess that the