Minutes 1966 Jan to June - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.-:Tator Superintendent exnla.i.ned .]2" ma.in as outlined in Adamson report was adequate for a.r-a proposed in district outlined rut d _dn't anticipate for Frie�ndly Acres ser- vice area which would be a part of City system ,when acquired. Mayor Rosselli, asked this discussion be continued after public hearing scheduled for this time. Continued PUILTC HEARING, Resolution of Tntenti.on to 14odi.fy and Amend Resolution No. 4609, Altamont -Midfield -Utah ',day and Vicinity Tmprovement declared open and affi- davits of.' publication and mailing ordered filed. There were no written communications reported. City Manager reported on bids received from following: Douglass & Woodhouse, Redwood City 150,307.29 Kunz Paving Co., San Mateo 158,198.16 Rragato Paving 13o. , Belmont 182, 308.29 City Fng_t.neer's estimate on this project was $149,962.07 making low bid of Douglass & 1.1oodhouse only $345.22 over Engineer's estimate. He reminded Council previous low, and only bid received for this project earlier was $203,889.55, which was rejected. He stated City Engineer recommended contract for this project be awarded to Douglass & Woodhouse, to which recommendation he concurred. Johnson C. Montgomery, 30-60 Altamont, stating he was representing Nancy R. Montgomery, and presented a state- ment entitled "Majority protest against Resolution No. 4909" signed by "Nancy R. Montgomery, agent for owners of more than 50% of the land in the district." Mr. Montgomery in remarks concerning basis for protest, threatened to file an action immediately unless the City either reduced assessments or contributed an additional $6,000 to this district. Mayor Rosselli asked for show of hands indicating those represented by Mr. Mont- gomery and show of hands indicated that Mr. Montgomery only represented two or three people present. Mayor Rosselli asked Staff to explain difference in amount of proposed and previous assessments and to also advise for benefit of those present what City investment in this project was to this point. City Engineer stated only item deleted from previous estimate was trees which amounted to about $7,000, with no comparison possible between two estimates, as this last estimate based on better information. An additional sum was added to the "incidentals and contingencies" item to cover unforeseen conditions, and if a surplus remains after completion of the project, a refund will be made to the property owners in proportion to actual assessments. City Attorney advised acquisition was largely in the form of change of grade pro- blems, which resulted in relocation of some improvements. City Attorney stated acr_uisition costs to date slightly under $44,900 with 43 parcels having been nego- tiated and settled and one remaining unsolves situation which he explained, and stated this might run the costs higher if litigation necessary. He also reviewed an additional complication caused by Mr. Johnson Montgomery claiming title to portion of property in the actual. right of way. He felt there was no legal basis, but initiated as a harassment which could run total cost of district up in litigation expense. City Manager stated more than $60,000 is invested in this project by City.