Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBPW-08-24-98 SPECIALCity of Carmel PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE SPECIAL MEETING CARMEL BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY MONDAY, AUGUST 24, 1998 --10 A.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS / CITY HALL / ONE CIVIC SQUARE Notice is hereby given the City of Carmel Board of Public Works and Safety will hold a public hearing on Monday, August 24, 1998, at 10 a.m. in the Council Chambers, City Hall, One Civic Square. The purpose of this heating is to discuss the establishment of a neighborhood improvement district and the adoption of a resolution approving the installation of entry signs and an ornamental street lighting system in a portion of the Cool Creek North Subdivision, to allow owners of real property in the proposed neighborhood improvement district and other interested persons an opportunity to be heard on the establishment of the district, and to allow the Board of Public Works and Safety, at the conclusion of the heating, to take final action regarding the establishment of the district and the completion of the project. ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571-2400 CARMEL BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, AUGUST 24, 1998 --10 A.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS / CITY HALL / ONE CIVIC SQUARE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor James Brainard; Board Members Billy Walker and Mary Ann Burke. Deputy Clerk Cindy Sheeks also attended. Mayor Brainard called the meeting to order at 10 a.m. Resolution CC-08-24-98-01. Establishment of an Improvement District and the Installatio. of Entry Signs and Ornamental Street Lighting in the Cool Creek North Subdivisioii Mayor Brainard explained this meeting included a public hearing to allow owners of real property in the proposed neighborhood improvement district (part of Cool Creek North) and other interested persons an opportunity to be heard on the establishment of the district. He stated that after the public hearing, the Board would consider adopting a resolution that: 1) established part of Cool Creek North as the improvement district, and 2) approved the installation of entry signs and an ornamental street lighting system in a portion of the Cool Creek North Subdivision. The mayor asked Kim Bickell of the Bonar Group to make a short presentation so citizens in the audience would understand what was being proposed. Mr. Bickell explained the problems with the current lighting system in Cool Creek North subdivision and what improvements would be made if the board approved this resolution. He stated the proposal also included replacing all existing Cool Creek North signs with new signs. The mayor opened the public hearing. Chick Gayley, 1323 Sumac Court, asked Mr. Bickell questions about the efficiency of the lights and their brightness. Mayor Brainard asked everyone speaking at the public hearing to please use the microphone so the clerk-treasurer would have an accurate record of the hearing. Mr. Gayley asked what materials were in the proposed lamp posts. Mr. Bickell stated the posts were aluminum with concrete bases Dean Schaffer, 96 Red Oak Lane, stated he wanted to know the cost per household and how it would be collected over what period of time. He asked why the neighborhood was replacing street lights that were inefficient but still worked well. He disputed Mr. Bickell's statement that the wiring was 30 years old. Darrell Johnson, 542 Tulip Poplar Crest, explained the project was initiated about two years ago by the Cool Creek North Homeowner's Association because the neighborhood was having maintenance problems with the lights. He stated a number of the lights were failing and the neighborhood was having trouble getting them fixed. He stated the poles, which were fiberglass, also were failing, and that a contractor had looked at them and didn't think they were worth getting fixed. Mr. Johnson stated the homeowner's association had established and advertised monthly meetings each of wkich included a discussion of the lights and an update of the lighting project. He stated he was the one who had developed the $142,000 estimate. Mr. Johnson explained that under the Barrett Law, the neighborhood could either spread the cost equally across all home owners in the neighborhood or could distribute the cost in proportion to the size of each person's property. He stated the homeowner's board decided to spread the cost equally among all household owners, which worked out to be about $600 per household. This cost could be paid at the inception of the project or could be financed over 10 to 20 years at a cost of about $80 per year, paid twice a year. Mr. Johnson explained that when the homeowner's association carried the petition to all homeowners in the district, 63 pement of the homeowners signed the petition. Those carrying the petitions also carded a fact sheet describing the lights and giving the details of the project. He stated the petition had been reviewed by the City attorney before being taken to homeowners. ~, 1520 Cool Creek Drive, stated he lived in Cool Creek subdivision, not Cool Creek North, but wanted to know what authority homeowner's associations and individual homeowners had in regard to the Barrett Law. Mayor Brainard stated the Barrett Law originally was passed in the 1920's by the state legislature. He explained that the law allowed homeowners in a specific area to make improvements that would benefit everyone in that area, and to assess those costs among all the people in that area. He explained the City provides standard street lights, generally on major streets (excluding Old Town), but that the Barrett Law allows neighborhoods to make improvements above and beyond the City's standards, which usually don't include residential streets. Mayor Brainard stated that the law allows the project to be accomplished with only 25 pement of the homeowners' signatures, but he hoped Cannel would adopt a policy not permitting any Barrett Law projects without at least 60 pement of the homeowners in favor of it. Rick Hall of Barnes and Thornburg, explained the Board of Public Works and Safety was the entity that determined the interest rate if homeowners decided to finance the cost. Mr. Johnson explained that the Barrett Law did not require a homeowner's association, but could be used by any group of property owners who wanted improvements for their area. Board Member Walker explained he had been involved in neighborhood upgrades during his previous term on the Board prior to the inception of the Barrett Law. Mr. Schaffer asked if the cost of the signs could he removed from the total amount to be divided among all homeowners in Cool Creek North because his street and one other street, which were north of 131st Street, did not receive benefits from the signs. Mr. Johnson stated the signs were estimated at $12,000. Mayor Brainard asked how many homeowners lived north of 131st Street and would not benefit from the signs. Mr. Johnson estimated that out of 237 homes, maybe 46 houses were north of 13 l~t Street. Mayor Brainard stated the difference for the 46 homeowners if the $12,000 was not included in their part of the cost would be about $8 or $9. Mr. Gayley stated that some of the 46 homes north of 131~t Street were receiving a financial benefit even if the $12,000 wasn't removed from their payment. He stated that based on property value, the increase caused by this project was proportionately much smaller for those homeowners. Rick Hall stated that sewers, sidewalks, road improvements, lighting and other landscaping improvements could be done under the Barrett Law withj ust 25 percent of property owner approval. Mayor Bralnard reiterated he had no intent to approve any Barrett Law project without majority approval. ~, Lot 39 of Cool Creek North, stated that when homeowners kept up their property it improved property values, and that it was important to keep their neighborhood in good condition. Stuart Lawrence, 1473 Second Way, agreed with Ms. Lewitsky. Seeing no else who wished to speak, the mayor closed the public hearing at 10:34 a.m. Board Member Walker moved to introduce Resolution CC-08-24-98-01. Board Member Burke seconded. Board Member Walker moved to change the words in the third paragraph from 25 percent to 60percent. Mayor Brainard seconded. Board Member Walker asked what would happen if homeowners said they couldn't afford the tax and didn't pay it. Mr. Johnson stated the assessment would be a lien against their property and the property would be subject to foreclosure. Mayor Brainard stated that the lien probably would remain against the house until it was sold and then would come out of the proceeds. Mayor Brainard asked Mr. Hall why the resolution he prepared did not have a term of years for financing in it. Mr. Hall explained the procedure leading up to this determination: today the board could confirm the petition and order the completion of the project. Then the board would approve three appraisers to look at the property affected by the project to determine the mount each is benefited. After that, the board would approve this preliminary assessment and the notice of construction. Once the final costs were determined, the board would approve a final assessment determining how much each property owner pays and how much the City pays. At this point, the board also would determine over what length of time and at what interest rate those property owners' assessments could be deferred. Douglas C. Haney, Cannel city attorney, stated that this project probably will cost more than $150,000, requiring it to be bid under the Common Construction Wage law. He stated a Common Construction Wage Hearing had been scheduled and advertised for tomorrow at 7 p.m. The mayor explained the purpose of the Common Construction Wage law. The board voted 3-0 to change the words in the third paragraph from 25percent to 60percent. Resolution CC-08-24-98-01. as amended, was a~nproved 3-0. Bid Awards for the 4th Street and Main Streets Intersection Pro_iect and the Old Town Streetsca_nc Project: Mayor Brainard moved to add the items to the agenda. Board Member Walker seconded. The items were added to the agenda 3-0. Deputy Clerk Sheeks stated she had not received any back-up material for these two items. Mayor Brainard stated the board had not received anything at this point yet either, but that awarding the bids now prevented the board from calling another special meeting in 48 hours. City Engineer Kate Boyle recommended the board award the bid for the Old Town Streetscape Project to CC&T Construction Co., Inc. for $1,498,846.50, the lowest most responsible and responsive bid. Board Member Walker moved to award the bid as recommended. Mayor Brainard seconded. The bid for the Old Town Streetscane Project was awarded 3-0 to' CC&T for $1.498,846.50. Ms. Boyle estimated that construction ~ould begin within two weeks. Ms. Boyle recommended the board award the bid for the 4th Street and Main Street Intersection Project to the sole bidder, Calumet Asphalt Paving Co., Inc. for $414,770.40. She stated the bid was the lowest, most responsible and responsive bid. Mayor Brainard moved to approve the bid. Board Member Burke seconded. Ms. Boyle stated this project also should begin in about two weeks. She explained that the company should have the traffic signal up by the end of this construction season, but probably would have to wait until next year to pave the intersection and add the sod. The bid for the 4~ Street and Main Streets Intersection Project was awarded 3-0 Calumet for $414,770.40. The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 a.m. Clerk-Treasurer Diana L. Cor~AMC Attest: C~rerk~E ~AMC Apl~ed, ",// d~a~or James Brainard