Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Ordinance 5414
ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ADOPTING ESTIMATES OF THE COST OF IMPROVE- MENTS AND OF AMOUNTS TO BE ASSESSED FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON A PORTION OF SmA3MTf A4nlTil� AND PORTIONS OF SUNDRY OTHER STREETS, AVENUES AND PUBLIC PLACES IN THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, TERAS; FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING TO TU OWNERS OF ABUTTING PROPERTY AND TO ALL OTHERS INTERESTED; DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO GIVE NOTICE OF SUCH HEARING; AND DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO ENGROSS AND ENROLL THIS ORDINANCE BY COPYING THE CAPTION OF SAME IN THE MINUTE BOOK OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND BY FILLING THE COMPLETE ORDINANCE IN THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE RECORDS OF THE CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fort Worth,Texas,has heretofore ordered that each of the hereinafter described portions of streets, avenues and public places in the City of Fort Worth, Texas, be im- proved by raising, grading and filling same and by constructing thereon the following, to-wit; 1. STANLEY AVENM From Butler.Street to the South Line of Lot 7, Block 10, University Hill Addition, known and designated as Unit No. 1, a 6-inch hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 30 foot roadway. 2. JAMES STREET From the South Line of Dickson Street to the South Edge of Butler Street, known and designated as Unit No. 2, a 6-inch hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 30 foot roadway. 3. BILGLADE ROAD From the West Line of Wellview Avenue to the East Line of Merida Avenue, known and designated as Unit No. 3, a 6-inch hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 36 foot roadway. 4. B.ILGLA.DE ROAD From the East Line of Merida Avenue to the East Line of Sandage Avenue, known and desig- nated as Unit No. 4, a 6-inch hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 36 foot roadway. 5. BILGLADE ROAD From the East Line of Sendage Avenue to the West Line of lIcCart Street, known and designated as Unit No. g, a 6-inch hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 36 foot roadway. 6. FLINT STREET From the East Line of South Henderson Street to the West Line of South Adams Street, known and desig- nated as Unit No. 6, a 6-inch hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 30 foot roadway. 7. HAMMOND STREET From the East Line of May Street to the East Line of Lot 2 Block 30, South Side Addition, known and designated as Unit No. 7, a 6-inch - hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 30 foot roadway. 8. THORNHILL DRIVE From the )"est Line of Tract 4-D, J. Thornhill Survey to the West Line of Lot 16, Block 1. Martin Place Addition, known and-designated as Unit Pio, 8, a 7 1/2-inch hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 40 foot roadway. r N , 9. ST. LOUIS AVMTUy From the North Line of Fogg Street to the South Edge of Pafford Street, known and designated as Unit No. 9, a 6-inch hot- mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 26 foot roadway. 10. LOMO STRH]T From the East Line Service Road, North - ronth Freeway to the West Line of Evans Avenue, known and designated as Unit No. 10, a 6-inch hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 30 foot roadway. 11. LOMO STP22T From the Nest Line of Evans Avenue to the East Line of New York Avenue, known and designated as Unit No. 11, a 6-inch-hot- mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 30 root roadway. 12. LOMO STREET Fron the East Line of New York Avenue to the West Line of Cole Street, known and designated as Unit No. 12, a 6-inch hot- mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 30 foot roadway. 13. SOUTH MAIN STREET From the North Line of Thornhill Drive to the South Line of Seminary Drive, Down and designated as Unit No. 13, a 7 1/2- inch hot-mix asphaltic concrete pavement on a 40 foot roadway. together with combined concrete curbs and gutters on proper grade and line where same are not already so constructed, together with storm sewers and drains and other necessary incidentals and appurtenances; all of said improvements to be constructed as and where shown on the Plans and in strict accordance with the Plans and Specifications therefor; and contract therefor has been made and entered into with 'N._ E. Brittain,_ ____-In" —_ ; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fort Worth, Texas, has caused the Public Works Director to prepare and file estimates of the cost of such improvements and estimates of the amounts per front foot proposed to be assessed against abutting property-and the owners thereof, and such estimates have been ex- amined. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COINCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS, THAT: I. Such estimates be, and they are hereby adopted and approved. II. It is hereby found and determined that the cost of improvements on each portion of street,avenue and public place hereinafter described, with the amount or amounts per front foot proposed to be assessed for such improvements against abutting property and the owners thereof, are as follows, to-wit: 1. STANLEY AVENUE From Butler Street to the South Line of Lot 7, Block 10, University Hill Addition, known and designated as Unit No. 1. 'Che estimated cost of improvements is S 5_2831-38_ _ _ ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is -S 1.98 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 4.66 ; the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is 6.64_ 2. JAMES STREET From the South Line of Dickson Street to the South Line of Butler Street, known and designated as Unit No. 2. The estimated cost of improvements is S 11, 005.23 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is S 1.98 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 4.66 the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is x__6.64 _ . - t f r ' 3. BILGLAMS ROAD From the W*pt Line of Vellview Avenue to the Bast Line of Merida Avenue, known and designated as Unit No. 3. The estimated cost of improvements is $ 5,54p,-34 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 5.75 the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is $7.7.3 4. BILGLADE ROAD From the East Line bf Merida Avenue to the :wast Line of Sandage Avenue, known and designated as Unit No. 4. The estimated cost of improvements is $ 7,544.75 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $ I-qX ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $-5-75--; the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is $ 7.733 . 5. BILGLADE ROAD From the East Line of Sandage Avenue to the West Line of MaCart Street, known and designated as Unit No- 5. The estimated cost of improvements is $5.987 57 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $ 1,98 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 5.75 ; the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is $ 7-73 6. Y'LnTT STRFj,T From the East Line of South Henderson Street to the West Line of South Adams Street, known and designated as Unit No. 6. The estimated cost of improvements is $-4.2r,2-&) ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $-1-98 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 4.99 ; the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is 7. H&MYOND STREET From the East Line of May Street to the East Line of Lot 2, Block 30, South Side Addition, known and designated as Unit No. 7. The estimated cost of improvements is $ 7,928,70 the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $?-98 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 4.66 ; the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is $ 6.64 . 8. TPORNHILL -MM Prrom the West Line of Tract 4-D, J. Thornhill Survey to the West Line of Lot 16, Block 1, Martin Place Addition, known and designated As Unit No. 9. The estimated cost of improvements is $x._93]39 the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $ 1 98 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 7.53 the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is $ 9-51 9. ST. LOUIS AVENUE From the North Line of Fogg Street to the South Edge of Pafford Street, knot•rn and designated as Unit No. 9. The estimated cost of improvements is $ 2.795.54 the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $ 1.98 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 3.95 the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is s---5-93--. 10. LOMO STREET From the East Line Service Road, North - South Freeway to the West Line of Evans Avenue, known and designated as Unit No. 10. The estimated cost of improvements is $ 7. 6 . E the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $ 1.98 • the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ X1.66 ; the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is $ 11. LOMO STREET From the best Line of Elans Avenue to the East Line of New York Avenue, known and designated as Unit No. 11. The estimated cost of improvements is 78 the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $ 1.98 • the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 4.66 ; the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is $_ 6.64 12. LCMO STREET From the East Line of New York Avenue to the ?lest Line of Cole Street, known and designated as Unit No. 12. The estimated cost of improvements is $— 5.5�i � __—; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $ 1.,98 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ 4.66 the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is $ 6.64 13. South Main Street From the North Line of Thornhill Drive to the South Line of Seminary Drive, known and designated as Unit No. 1j. The estimated cost of improvements is $—'5-611-37 the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $1.98 ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ J.53 —; the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is $ 9.51__. The estimated cost of improvements is $ _ the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for combined concrete curb and gutter is $ ; the estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof for improvements exclusive of curb and gutter is $ the total estimated amount per front foot to be assessed against abutting property and the owners thereof is ` z III. A hearing be given and held by and before the City Council of the City of Fort Worth,Texas,to all own- ing or claiming any property abutting upon said portions of streets,avenues and public places,as well as to all owning or claiming any interest in any such property.Such hearing shall be given and held on the— 5thday of A%-Ut , 196_, at 9230 be M• , in the Council Chamber in the City Hall in the City of Fort Worth, Texas, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to give notice of the time and place of such hearing and of other matters and facts in accordance with the terms and provisions of an Act passed at the First Called Session of the Fortieth Legislature of the State of Texas, and known as Chapter 106 of the Acts of said Ses- sion, now benig shown as Article 1105b of Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes.Such notice shall be by advertisement at least three times in a newspaper published in the City of Fort Worth,Texas,the first publication to be made at least ten days before the date of said hearing.Said notice shall comply with and be in accordance with the terms and provisions of said Act. The City Secretary is further directed to'give personal notice of the time and place of such hearing to all owning or claiming any property abutting on said portions of streets,avenues and public places, as well as to all owning or claiming any interest in any such property. Such personal notice shall be given by the City Secretary mailing said notice postage prepaid, to the respective owners of record of the properties to be assessed, and to any person owning or claiming any interest in said properties,to the last known address of said owner or persons. It shall not be necessary for the City Secretary to mail said notices to any owner or other person claiming an interest in the property to be assessed when the addess of such owner or other person claiming an interest in the property to be assessed is unknown to the City Secretary and cannot be determined by the City Secretary after reasonable investigation. In this connection the City Secretary shall prepare and file with these proceedings a list of the properties to be assessed, the names of those persons own- ing or claiming any interest in said properties to whom the notice was mailed, together with the last known address of the respective owners and those persons owning or claiming any interest in said property. The City Secretary shall certify that each of the parties named in said list whose address was known to him, was mailed a copy of the notice of hearing and shall further certify the date or dates on which said notice was mailed. A copy of the notice shall be attached to such certificate. The certificate of the City Secretary will be conclusive evidence of the facts therein recited. Failure of the City Secretary to give notice of hearing by mail as herein provided for, or failure of the owners or other persons interested to receive said notice,shall in nowise invalidate said hearing or any assessments levied pursuant to said hearing, but notice of hearing shall be sufficient, valid and binding upon all owning or claiming such abutting property or any interest therein when same shall have been given by newspaper advertisement as first hereinabove provided. IV. The City Secretary is hereby directed to engross and enroll this ordinance by copying the caption of same in the Minute Book of the City Council and by filing the complete ordinance in the appropriate Ordinance Records of this City. V. This ordinance shall take effect and a in full force and effect from and after the date of ' passage. Passed and approved this_ _/_f4.— _day of—__ —_ __ _, 19 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney ie v AAM( -_L - m E W�N .c }t E (),�r odYl vi ' �j)Il00 _ s". . �tl {+ F .; tr 8�!CK u/ VicturyBEWICK/ WOODI nri. I, D AVF �.ollege 500 IC,IOi)ISOIrn I U i �-- -•�== �.--r- BID ISDN ,., >, Rcecrvioir MCNDn > .n 1 ` 014; !_ RI "� Q U' a R1PY rn Y 'c�O• ¢ cc >j1 RIP�Yr�- ` Id It > > > 't c7 o < `' � n w W MINDEN E i Q BUTLER > (` < < a BUTLER p FiUTLER D o 6 110, S D.CkSON vi w w O N DICKS DN �- ¢ N �� WACG06iAN Q a < � c I KSC N rn DICKS i N , O� L Z WAGGOMAN M < m Wt Ac[6MAN 4 I o r✓a w m `t� Z O"P—At FORmD H --L-P- FFPAFFORD OORD PAFFORD foGOo �oIFOGG ! , ••-T—r D?Ew Z iErr > 13 z > < DREW W. i w - > < DREW OJ w' > i zDAVIS !a a = MASON a Y, ! m MA50N Y_' BOLT -' " BOLT I LT A�ISPON i N f C Z Q > ,.i MALTA AVE. ✓ = m t ---tq. • o�� � FLINT I N FLINT d ;� MAti A;tICOx,�! co < j 7 v, AVE. ¢ EUCFm.E A' 2Y DR.J Ax w Nf V� i ROSEMONt �i, ANTHONYIn PRINE P: PARK `^ V rn aA PRINCE � �`• C ii V . N BROADUS . Q 6R0ADUS AVE. - r+ILL Ft -I PrP w Cr ¢ DEDDELL > ► w e W 4 SOUTH IST ``' _ 8 = w 0:z < PK L ` GAMBRELL r z w F " SAPTIST w T14cGLG"1CAl ��'� 731 'a- R W = 5 e``°a�� o r e� �' w HAM MOND 7 '�• p v W ',Er,� E SEJ.II;�ARY < a uj HAAiM tavo� Cr c` a�' Fn•-� ; 1 ©OYCE o AVE. W ; m N^�G� ti, H YCF w yr ,,; < SP RGEON T l S.P R6F..ON O .i t > `� j ,Q Z FELIX AVE.G Vl FELIX VE. SPURGEON Z @ C.f- # > >PUS iircC FULLER IIT W EAR0%1A IU i I FULLER AVi i LYDON m I ` nNAAT i n IYOON F'i ROWN UR. I i w W o tr YATES J o ni z. YATES i 71 Fort Worth General Depot II C�VC E RT -' 4A� T I Q I30V HC9C5T�r~I1 DR. LOCATIOW MAP /✓ ,E 0 u", z Tw z 0 ufta T W . 9 ULD G: �. y . 1 PUBLIC WORkS E�1G1E�l� Re;UG OEPARTINA.6Z 1T DIV1S10�1 t C.M. T'1-dELIU M. W. AMTS jP10. D{ACCTOA CNILP CUGINiLP* 1 ' 097_ 24000- 136 E . I 9 U '�..,��:� / � ! ,11 �. z -42 _34 ji 14" 0-1.4 A7 c. L A A40AIT ........... u 17 + .. NN 71 ig 7i !.Y I i 7 es, It z Af 41 iiA i za t6 p ?I rl Ile! 1.14 Woa G&OMA N 5T. 1% LOMO STRZIET PAVI NIG _L PROJECT 097-24000-136 1100 -7 7 T'71=1 'Sil 4 al E), D •I f;&.z - DR, F:'r oj e ct v o s 26 OD �� : � 2� 4 4 ATTACHMENT "B" Page 1 of 14 13 LOCATIONS - SOUTH SIDE 097-24000-136 PER CENT CONTRACT PRICL..................................................................... ,i 78,081.55 ...................................... ENGINEERING ............................................................................... 7,808.16 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST....................................................... .. 8S 889 ..................... ..................................f , .71 100.0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 7,809.7 88.7 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. 999.8 11.3 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 81809.5 100.0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................i 53,061.22 61.8 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... 9,508.10 11.0 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED...................................................... s 62,569.32 72.8 LESS CREDITS GRANTED................................................................................................ 19,943.96 23.2 TOTALNET ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................ 42,625.36 49.6 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE........................................................................................................s43p264.35 50.4 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET *8,727.5 5,078.0 PER CENT 100.0 58.2 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 112 71 CUMULATIVE RESULTS OF PER CENT 100.0 63.3 THE POST CARD SURVEY ARE AVAILABLE UPON NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 91 56 REQUEST. PER CENT 100.0 61.5 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 57 42 PER CENT 100.0 73.7 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 34 14 PER CENT 100.0 41.1 *City owned property (2 parcels - 82 feet) not included in these figures. ATTACEERNT "B" Page 2 of 14 STANLEY AVENUE Butler St. to 360' South PER Unit 1 CENT CONTRACT PRICE............................................................................................................5 5,301.25 ENGINEERING .............................................................................................................. 530.13 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST................................................................................................................S 5,831.38 100.0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 700 100.0 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. -0- -0- TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 700 100.0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................5 4,648.00 79.7 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... -0- -0- GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................5 4,648.00 79.7 LESS CREDITS GRANTED............................................................................................... 13,138.00 19.5 TOTAL NET ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................ 35,510.00 60.2 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE........................................................................................................5 2,321.38 39.8 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET *650 450 150 50 450 PER CENT 100.0 69.2 23.1 7.7 69.2 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 13 9 3 1 9 PER CENT 100.0 69.2 23.1 7.7 69.2 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 11 7 3 1 7 PER CENT 100.0 63.6 27.3 9.1 63.6 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 4 3 2 0 2 PER CENT 100.0 75.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 7 4 1 1 5 PER CENT 100.0 57.1 14.3 14.3 71.4 *Excl#&des 50' (1 parcel) City awned property. ATTACHMENT "B" Page 3 of 14 JAMES STREET Dickson to Butler Unit 2 PER CENT CONTRACTPRICE............................................................................................................; 10!004t75 ENGINEERING .............................................................................................................. 19000.48 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST...................:.............................................................................................;119 005.23 100.0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 1141.6 lOOi 0 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE..............................- oto TOTAL FOOTAGE....................................... . 1141.6 100.:.0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................= 79580.22 68.8 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... -O- 0.0 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................IF 79580.22 68.8 LESSCREDITS GRANTED................................................................................................ 32971.08 36.0 TOTALNET ASSESSMENT...............................................................................................................................• 3$609.14 32.8 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE........................................................................................................i 79396.09 67.2 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED -- - .............. NO. OF FRONT FEET 1141.6 761.6 375.6 0 766" PER CENT 100.0 66.7 32.9 0 67.1 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 8 4} 0 5 PER CENT 100.0 88.9 44.4 0 55.6 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 8 7 3tl 0 5 PER CENT 100.0 87.5 37.5 0 62.5 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 7 7 3 O 4 PER CENT 100.0 100.0 42.9 0 57.1 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 1 0 0 0 1 PER CENT 100.0 0 0 0 100.0 ATTACHMENT "B" Page 4 of 14 BILGLADE ROAD Wellview to Merida PER Unit 3 CENT CONTRACTPRICE............................................................................................................= 59043?95 ENGINEERING ............................................................................................................. 504.39 ESTIMATEDCONSTRUCTION COST.............................................................................................................. 59548.34 loot 0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 298 loot 0 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. -0- 0.0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 298 loot 0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................= 29303.54 41.5 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... -0- of 0 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................s 29303.54 41=5 LESS CREDITS GRANTED................................................................................................ 19223.54 22t o TOTAL NET ASSESSMENT,............................................................................................................................... 1 T OBS O 19.5 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE..........................................................................................I......,......; 49468.34 80.5 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OSJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET 298 0 149 149 PER CENT 100.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 e PARCELS OF PROPERTY 2 0 i PER CENT 100.0 4J 0 50.0 50.0 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 2 .4Jr1 0 1 1 PER CENT 100 0 H 0.0 50.0 50.0 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 2 0 Z PER CENT 100.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 0 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 0 0 0 0 PER CENT ATTACHMEM' "B" Page 5 of 14 BILGLADE ROAD Merida to Sandage Unit 4 PER CENT CONTRACT PRICE............................... ........... = 69822,50 ENGINEERING ............................................................................................................. 682.25 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST................................................................................................................5 79,504.75 10q.0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 560 loot 0 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. _0- 010 TOTAL FOOTAGE ... 560 10010 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT..................................... ..$ 4,,328.80 57=7 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT -0- 010 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................5 4y328,80 57f7 LESS CREDITS GRANTED................................................................................................ 29366.80 31.6 TOTAL NET ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................ 1,962.00 26.1 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE.......................................................................................................55,542.75 73.9 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AQAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION FAVINQ PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET 560 280 140 140 PER CENT 100.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 4 2 1 1 PER CENT 100.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 4 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 4 L 1 1 PER CENT 100,0 50.0 25.0 25.0 .rl OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 2 0 1 1 PER CENT 100.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 2 U 2 PER CENT 100.0 1 100.0 0 0 ATTACHMENT "B" Page 6 of 14 BILGLADE ROAD Sandage to McCaxt Unit 5 PER , CENT CONTRACTPRICE............................................................................................................5 52443.25 ENGINEERING .......................................................I...................................................... 544.32 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST.................. ........................................................................................; 599$7,57 100.0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 560 100.Q COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. -0- 0.0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 560 10010 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................s 49328.80 72i COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... -O- 0.0 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................; 49328.80 7212 LESS CREDITS GRANTED.................................................................I...........I.................. 29195,53 36.6 TOTAL NET ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................ 29133.27 35.6 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE.......................................................................................................s 39854.30 64.4 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION RAYING PAYING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET 560 140 140 280 PER CENT 100.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 4 1 1 2 PER CENT 100.0 0 25.0 25.0 50.0 'd NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 4 1 16 2 PER CENT 100.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 •rl OWNERS 3 H 1 0 2 PER CENT LIVING ON STREET 100.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 4.3 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 101 1 1 0.0 10 0.0 PER CENT ATTACHMENT "B" Page 7 of 14 FLINT STREET Henderson to S. Adams Unit 6 PER CENT CONTRACTPRICE............................................................................................................= 3,866 00 ENGINEERING .............................................................................................................. 386.60 ESTIMATEDCONSTRUCTION COST............. . . . ......................................................................................sg 49252.60 100.0 . RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 500 100.0 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. -0- 0.0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 500 100.0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT.......................................I.............. 39320.00 78.0 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... ma 0.0 a GROSSAMOUNT ASSEUED..........................................................................................; 39320.00 78!0 LESSCREDITS GRANTED.......................................................................I........................ 19394.63 3217 TOTALNET ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................ 19925.37 45.3 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE......................................................................... .......I...... ....; 29327.23 54.7 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAYING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET 500 375 375 0 125 PER CENT 100.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 25.0 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 4 3 3 0 1 PER CENT 100.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 25.0 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 4 3 3 0 1 PER CENT 100.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 25.0 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 4 3 3 0 1 PER CENT 100.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 25.0 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 0 0 0 0 0 PER CENT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ATTACHMENT "B" Page 8 of 14 HAMMOhD AVENUE May St. to the end9440' east. PER Unit 7 CENT CONTRACTPRICE,..........................................................................................................$ 79117.00 ENGINEERING .............................................................................................................. 711.70 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST...............................................................................................................$ 79828.70 100.0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................872 loot COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. -0- 0.0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 872 10010 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................$59790.08 73,9 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... oa 0.0 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................$ 59790,08 7319 LESS CREDITS GRANTED................................................................. 19 267.94 16,2 TOTALNET ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................ 4t 522. 14 57.7 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE........................................................................................................=39306.56 42.3 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET x 840 480 395 120 325 PER CENT 100.0 57.1 47.0 14.3 38.7 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 21 12 10 3 8 PER CENT 100.0 57.1 47.6 14.3 38.1 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 16 10 9 2 5 PER CENT 100.0 62.5 56.2 12.5 31.3 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 12 9 8' 2 2® PER CENT 100.0 75.0 66.7 16.7 16.6 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 4 1 1 0 3 100.0 25 0 25.0 0.0 75.0 PER CENT Excludes 1 parcel ( 321 ) City Owned property. ATTACHMENT "B" Page 9 of 14 THORNHILL DRIVE S. Main St. to 2001 Wtst PER Unit 8 CENT CONTRACTPRICE............................................................................................................5 49119.45 ENGINEERING ............................................................................................................. 411.95 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST................................................................................................................5 4.531.40 10020 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ -0- QS 0 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. 439*a 100.0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 439.8 100.0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................5 -0- 0.0 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... 49182.50 92:3 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................5 4,x.82.50 92.3 LESSCREDITS GRANTED................................................................................................ 237.60 5.2 TOTALNET ASSESSMENT............................................................................................................................... 3,944 90 87.1 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE....................................................................................................a.. 586.50 12.9 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET 439.8 219.9 99.9 169.9 170 PER CENT 100.0 50.0 22.7 38.6 38.7 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 6 4 2 0 4 PER CENT 100.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 66.7 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 4 2 1 1 2 PER CENT 100.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 0 0 0 0 0 PER CENT OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 4 2 1 1 2 PER CENT 100.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 ATTACHMENT "B" Page 10 of 14 ST. LOUIS AVENUE Fogg to Pafford PER Unit 9 CENT CONTRACT PRICE............................................................................................................= 29541.40 ENGINEERING .............................................................................................................. 254.14 ESTIMATEDCONSTRUCTION COST................................................................................................................5 29795.54 10000 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 480 loot p COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. -0- 0.0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 480 100.0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................j 29846.40 101,8 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... _0- 0.0 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................= 29846.40 101.8 LESS CREDITS GRANTED................................................................................................ 19280.40 45.8 TOTAL NET ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................ 10566,00 56.0 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE........................................................................................................i 19229.54 44.0 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET 480 4809 360 0 120 PER CENT 100.0 100.0 75.0 0.0 25.0 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 4 4 3 0 1 PER CENT 100.0 100.0 75.0 0.0 25.0 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 2 2c 1 0 1 PER CENT 100.0 100.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 2 2 1 0 1 PER CENT 100.0 100.0 50,0 0.0 50.0 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 0 0 0 0 0 PER CENT ATTACHMENT "B" Page 11 of 14 LOMO STREET N-S Freeway to Evans Ave. Unit 10 PER CENT CONTRACT PRICE............................. i 6 t 787.00 ............................................................................... ENGINEERING .............................................................................................................. 678.70 ESTIMATEDCONSTRUCTION COST................. ............................................................................................i 79465.70 100,0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE ...... 932 100.0 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. -0- Ot 0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 932 100t 0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................i 69188.48 82,9 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT - Ot 0 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................i 6,188,148 82t 9 LESS CREDITS GRANTED................................................................................................ 19496.24 20t 0 TOTAL NET ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................ 49692.24 62.9 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE........................................................................................................i 29773.46 37.1 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED 932E 792 256 140 536 NO. OF FRONT FEET 100.0 84.9 27.5 15 0 57.5 PER CENT 14 12 4 2 8 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 100.0 85.7 28.6 14.3 57.1 PER CENT 11 9 4� 2� 58 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 100.0 81.8 36.5 18.1 4.5.4 PER CENT 8 8 3 0 5 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 100.0 100.0 37.5 0.0 62.5 PER CENT 3 1� 1� 2 0 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 100.0 33.3 33.3 66.7 0.0 PER CENT ATTACHMEW "B" Page 12 of 14 Lomo Street Evans Ave. to N. Y. Ave. PER Unit 11 CENT CONTRACTPRICE...........................................................................................................= 109 884.35 ENGINEERING ............................................................................................................. 1,088.44 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST................:..........:....................................................................................$ 11,972.79 loot 0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 1120 loot o COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. -0_ 0.0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 1120 100.0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................$7,436.80 62.1 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... -0- 010 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................1 79436.80 62.1 LESS CREDITS GRANTED.............................................................................I.................. 19388.80 1116 TOTALNET ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................ 6,O48 t OO 50t 5 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE........................................................................................................= 51,924.79 49 5 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION -TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET 1120Y 770 420 70 630 PER CENT 100.0 08.7 37.5 6.3 56.2 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 1$ 11. 7 1 lO PER CENT 100.0 61.1 38.8 5.6 55.6 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 14 10 5 1 8 PER CENT 100.0 71.4 35.7 7.2 57.1 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 6 5 3 1 2 PER CENT 100.0 83.3 50.0 16.7 33.3 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 8 5 2 0 6 PER CENT 100.0 62.5 25.0 0.0 75.0 ATTACHMENT "B" Page 13 of 14 IM STREET New York to Cole Unit 12 PER • CENT CONTRACT PRICE........................................................................... i 59049,40 ................................. ENGINEERING .... 504'94 .......................................................................................................... ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST................. ..............................................................................t 5,554.34 100,0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ 646.1 1001 0 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. -0- 0.0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 646.1 10090 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................= 49290.10 77,2 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... 010 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................: 49290,P10 77,2 LESS CREDITS GRANTED................................................................................................ 874.60 15.7 TOTALNET ASSESSMENT............................................................................................................................... 3 4�0 61.5 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LAROL..................................................................................................... .f 29138.84 38.5 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET 646.1 329.5 210& 06 436.1 PER CENT 100.0 50.9 32.5 0.0 67.5 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 9 5 3F 0 6 PER CENT 100.0 55.5 33.3 0.0 66.7 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 8 4& 3 0 5g PER CENT 100.0 50.0 37.5 0.0 62.5 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 6 4 1 g 0 5 PER CENT 100.0 66.7 16.7 0.0 83.3 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 2 0 2 0 0 PER CENT 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 ATTACHMENT "B" Page 14 of 14 SOUTH MAIN STREET Thornhill Dr. to Seminary Dr. Unit 13 PER CENT CONTRACT PRICE...............................• ...8 51101,25 ENGINEERING ................................ 510.12 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST...............................................................................................................: 51611.37 100,0 RESIDENTIAL FOOTAGE................................ _Oo 0.0 COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE.............................. 560 loot 0 TOTAL FOOTAGE............................................ 560 - loo.0 RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT......................................................S -0-. 0.0 COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT.................................................... 51325.60 94.9 GROSS AMOUNT ASSESSED..........................................................................................i 59325.60 94.9 LESS CREDITS GRANTED................................................................................................ 1 f 108.80 19.8 TOTAL NET ASSESSMENT,...,........................................................................................................................... 4x216.80 75.1 NET AMOUNT PAID BY CITY AT LARGE........................................................................................................i 11394.57 24.9 SIGNED RESULT OF POSTCARD SURVEY ORIGINAL FOR AGAINST NO OBJECTION TOTAL PETITION PAVING PAVING SUBMITTED NO. OF FRONT FEET 560 420 2B0� 0 280 PER CENT 100.0 75.0 50.0 50.0 PARCELS OF PROPERTY 4 3 2 0 2 PER CENT 100.0 75.0 50.0 0 0 50.0 NO. OF PROPERTY OWNERS 3 2 1 0 2` PER CENT 100.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 66.7 OWNERS LIVING ON STREET 1 1 0 0 1 PER CENT 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 OWNERS LIVING ELSEWHERE 2 1 1 0a 1` PER CENT 100.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 } W j O Z � OLOLO � LOa L7 OD Q H V W F- N W Z 1 O Z Q CL O co LO o UL z a z O � CW7 ~ C J 4 N cc W � 0 LO N011113d w m w U] w w 03N91S c y O I-W N oa0p p p 0 0 0yW c W co O O O O O O O O VNaa N N N N N N N O p Nz N O O O S O O O 0 O O NM N K N M MMN m C9 Cl)C� C14 C4 � mN M CC.) N t9 a s M M M Cl) M Cl) ('� M Cl) H H W O 10 �O .� '110 .10 .p .�0 100 a .o •o .o o .o .o .o o �c .o Z� Z O Wcc W O O O O O O O O O O U.IL Lo LO n n to to LO LO LO Lo S z T zO +� O F .14 a ah, c v a 'c N a W 7, O Y •-+ ^-I O O ¢PI } m z n W a O � a o Q.0 •••� 71 OBD %O LO N N N M } fL O �1 N vii ami 3N0Z w w m m as m wo m w w w Oco co }F.O..C�7 U) rr o• W Z G ti H H W w 3 to C a7 cc of } N p++14, a0 0 0 A Qy1 ++ x 6 ca �Ca o W N 0 C4 H O a H ti {a �h 'O• O ~ N h 24 T U a J O•f9 l� Z a) rl N N t0 A�yy ri "s O Z O N D Z W to OC X v C7 a}i N 4J aa)) 0) cob r�1 ami w b a a Qo w o .a 1 .i .r• w- w ar o w•N Hg w C w C O U C .]C r.- w. C •1• �•-� O a W h w w w u) i0 w W ca .i Ca C 4) C m •O Cq ZZ W a y.d w w C {a C {� f1 {a Cl p• 03 O i� •rt gPO H Q a al N b ONM. d3 bM 0N_ Co C �Mp .] � 7 t! cu Z W pN H O.'i-I �a-4 ++-4 H M H O �s A.N-t -A O m� �F,a O at:2 0A U x7 c)) xM H Lo �M 0.M a� a°M (n00 C6LL. C). § W 0wn 2 2 § OD k w B U W z Z U.CL w k ■ o § / w 0 � \ k « 1111 ad a = a a I \ k 2 \ @ 2 z o © 0 S 8 S S -4 �■ e o >. 2■U. a d 8 8 d 8« Q U. 41 % N % & §� ] « u � ■ -■ ■� ■ \ §©zk \ \ S S � C4 Q a t 222 q g Cl) q k � o $ $ $ 3 2 2 a. 0 3 3 Q 2 / \ § �w G 2 2 R §\ M U.� j / 1 ® $ z » j §® t E t 2 _ ,a. w � 2 \ g k a \ S S S � © z a. $ 2 ° - a. \ » � R « ° k « £ a \ § gq \ \ 2■Oz m m = m B\ . § oma Q w z * 5 X / j � cw 0� \ .\ \ \� _/ a En• • ® w -Q . ® Q . - ® ®- �. r ■ =mw 10 (n jj mJ - # E 2 /\ ■ k5 ■ ,« ®_ - g\ z w � { � �2g §\ 3 . jk 22 � a 2G§ 2W/ ° ° $qq 4 )] ~ § k02 k0Q )�\ §Q z kgs �d ƒG# � q 2«w� > W > o� N z O O m CID G co tr) � i 0% tr m at F- OU W H IL N Ch zQ O U a O O N z o Ot Q c a J %0 0 aai LL m m N011113d N N O 0 0 N N y 03NDIS > ~WZ U) N d C M F OO0 dzWwZo � � NNQNQ 4 N -4 .Oi ,U 'o N .a N N N cq Q Cl) c O N O p O O ) N ClmmvN NZ WmNN IT � Ofipp cv) cl Cl)c IY N Cl) N Ch M M M C4 n �- f-. H p c � � 10 W rn Q W O a oc a U. Z .o to y 0 z 10 `0 CKW W N O O O O N O co V W W WN n c d) m co a a ro z O OO cn 0 N Im U Q N N s to a W 14 d Nea •--� C F A W C; OD i O o a F- F IL O o tH N tai [t� Iq I4 Ni �1 �� to G Rro. !n N N c00 tT z i ray to 3 N O Z cQ < w co w as m N 5O� <PQa) M .p N K 4~� N W S � (0z a0 c 3 to ro LO at4'n 11 z +J a) 2s rn w w H rx 0 -t N C ca0 a u� y hoc $ zcr ,i ti H CQ '-"I +� tY p Q a W NY O O f� .--1 W a W N O yZ7 a y Q N w .-t U O al N a: 0! c 01 ^ as 0 W a w e e o d .CQ. cs. e .e ro E WO z (L ro C ro U >.W 0. ro C ro �-r Q s A ti .m a, oti oti ++ti .+e ti C 1Q U Q a @ ro a)z al 3 y a +3 0 CM 1: ll- 4:344-4 of -V .SN -N +7 VO Ht--c to W Z LL —4 a C9 .-t.rc G a Cl) a (� yN � O r = r a (o cocel) c c9 or- ot— � tn ++ t- M U C) U' 4' N r-c� N cA ti CA ti Cl) Cl) i%0) �4W [1 k | k 2© $ | f \ � q w B w § UNr 0 ) (L 0 0 % % z o U § k o U)I . ■ NoIlli2d 14TO O3NDIS , �w (n / o ` S Cl) kWk0 \ (n U. � o e > « Cl) ■ztn , . r OOW § \ K ■ 0 U) - & / <W0 p R ■� U- R z� U.§ \ \ \ z 0 k j ; e # @ 2 D aN 7 w In \ §LO aG � ■ a § 4 0 Ix _ g 'k (D. 3NOZ a m m 3 2� \ 7 § S w / / 0 ■ ) .o �# 0 0 9 2 k § �< w z w (_ 3 W C _ to _. (¢) w 3 CL \ k § 8 z 0 y ; @ -% .m§2 $�4 k & c<� a § cr k 0"* k k S ( « B LL U) © CL k k 42 § / k o c § § w § ■ N011 113d p7Tq.plA14TO O3NDIS � w e §$w § S 8 8 8 8 k§ kgymk k \ B e w §q 'tg k ' q / z � \ C4 \ g - k w \ p p R R ■ U. K r-! r-: R ow o LL U R k / / | 2 z d Q / { � 2 c C%4 Q§ � U n § S G G S z § § Q w e LO 0 CL \ ( m (08 Q q ® � c 2 > « # CQ & 3NOz m = o = w k o$ § � 2C') § w \ w z § B 0 3 ¥ ® �- -2 & � � � § Q g 2w � 4 � ca (a■ c « © mak/ k k§ / LU CL 4) 4 c F4 , � LLI iM $ � w 3 4 �: }£ `\k/ z0 2n 2J _G /4@ ] 2 j ] 2 $ c«LL. CL > k 2� \ k k 1-4 co k w b LL W CL k 4% k } 2 0 L § § K k \ ■ U- N$1 13d ! m 03NDIS zLU k � ■ S S 0 W� a / d e m Q § J 3 / G q @ � o © oz W § § q q m M 2 to \ \ \ \ � fm4KW Cl) ko R F2 R p CL 0 R R K K LL/ k \ k k 10 e Q Q § » LL 3 � k It w \ 2 G w § e \ ( 2) -1 Q q 4 a k § q S ]] 3NOz m m m m B■ § a�d 2 w k w Z g .9 § & 3 � #/ ® z CSE z w ` % 2 % & F-F- ) wCL �0 �\ �\ §\\ w a 2CL \ k � ■ � )� §j zB k\ k§ \ A\ cg7 ] ««w0. § Ix w 2 �� § j Ix w § I- U. U) IL k CDCD ° 2 U. U § � 0 §49 tr) LO q ■ 2 N011113d 63Ne,S Z(n ■ � S S • S § Cl) �■ � — . q §kU. § k k § j S b 0 § ■z 0 S 8 S S § @ £ u 8 8 k § § Clco g g Cl) � § §w o 3 I $ $ ■a 0 3 2 2 2 M w § k \ L6� j / q § § 2 j , . . 0 � o � a � co v � w 2 \ / � « 2 § � \ § §� Cl) c q _ U/ a. n) � # �U) § ) 3Noz ■ m m .o\ � :> U) . 3 2 z . §� ; � ; 4J � gqG ow � $ 5A t § % k ) Oa k � k kk /7 ®2 ~§momIL '1G # C4 ,0W ,g 41 U) Ed§ 2 L LL 0:3\ _ 07 §§ \ U) �} k} k? /? �« a } W O O O O N Z I CO Q I.- a w V W O I.- {L N N z OD 0 CL o 0 v o U- at a z o 4 J 4 N pp W O Q LLc N011113d C T C 1 03NDIS 0 zymes $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Q N W O .O �.Oi �U .O �D .D .O CV ,moi Q N W N N N N N N N N OON aa � h W O O O O O O O c�pp O O (` N Z N �O 10 %O �O �O .O V' .o 10 cr� N N N ?4 � 0 C-41 NO � N N N N N N N N CV W W p % .`o 10 % 10 10 Iz a 0 o .o .o .o o •o m a Z� Z 0 0 U. v v v v 0 v m v 0 � m Z 'ro C C in CL c a (no NV W O cM� c� 'p } J Cl) N (O`'1 M M N N N N N LO m d' 4 a �n a o w I IL o c eq N c'9 O CO O� z c to o O m to A 3 N 0 2 W d (h 0 0 }OO N W 4 4 0 W Z 4, N 3 .a orn rn o o a O aa NcNc w c U Z d Gs -4+; V c C c NO W C O N O .SG U -%4 U N O _i O N to CdO Cl O A Z 4 1 7 1 U C U C ro N 7 W w 44 uCL zu � Z d y e �,t • H C H C H C3 ro 3 c • '4 E gH a a H H ro C 3 N U N q er W Cl) w t- V - coma caws. } W N z 00 O Ix W N W z a o UL � a z O U. ccJ NO `nM v v W W K cn NOU11.3d d o m o o O ro o 0 C13NDIS A C T C C C T C C _ $ g zU)w 8 0 8 0 8 0 p W� c O� D �O 10 D .0 16 0 i UA 1L W Q N Q .i N N N N N N N N Q V F- W O O O O O O O O O N z N .o •O .100 10 10 10 10 .o W N N N N N N N N N N H Oaa !- C1 10 10 %D O 10 10 10 10 10 L 0 Is 10 .0 >0 �O •0 I0 H Z W U.W M VO d' C d0' C z z O C H vy CL O ' l Q 0 CA H N -+ W 10 J N M N N M m M M C07 } m F- cc d d a O z H o a a O NJ M OD •.-ai N N M •�-� .Ni s . 0 0 O m a 3NOZ m m m m m m m m as ro w � o W z N !-0 7 +) 4J +3 Or+ C O W C E U U U C V H z O A a w t0 r C : a Q C N N N A C r C C � W N O N O O �N �{- .K N o u 0 u 0 a to tq �.X X X ro 0 W IL � c ` � o0$ � Ma o ff. `5c°. =. ax W a •.-I .cd CC w C -61 -0 •O g H Q Q C E3 C � OC; OM OM •.+� 0m mRr U7 U •-� '-I O N 0 N C C C jCj [WA w Z 1iA-i +� O -F. -, CO•1--i tO rO .i ,y a C� �T 5C �7 xrt �fx x[z xc� hm C4l+.d § k 2» 2 \ 3 k LU b § U) (L k k j 2 U. @ � . § ■ © 2 9 ¥ w $ ■ N01 13d o _ § 03NOIS ` \ z§■ � S 8 S \ / 22w 2 3 2 ( _ Q 22LLcc � # G g ) « u I-- co 2 2 2 § ■2 ■ ol 2 g 2 2 2 U m k \ . G oat § k 0 3 3 3 CL 0 2 10 2 \ a z e ` a - LL� g ? ? \ / @ � * § j k . = w } k 0 u co \ / R \ R q e cr w 0 ® . % a 0 \ (D § � \ S � ; / \ k g5 7 o 3Noz m m m b] /0 § w k ) W z . B , j 4 2 t c ) © w k 2 R10 zw � ~ k / cc 2 ; U, � J= �k c@ w a 2 E§ � g / LL R /\ § 3 « M ) am ■C, m # 222a W N Z O O 0 �0 �0 LO O OD Q F W O U W ~ W f~!1 2 Ol o` O Z Q 10 e a o � � o a K Q z O t� J a` o+ W C9ol K N011113d c c 03N91S Z W cn H ODcoO %Oo V LO of Z O W H0Cf) w LO n ti 10 r- adQ � v � Cl) c ol m N Z N m .po %0 n CO 0 LO � L Np N . . 14 t OD o 00 W O O O N $ Z Q N LO to L M %0 IT -4 O Q F N wcrti O n n L, 0 o` o% C% o• o+ of U. Z F o+ m O WX00 .O0 �0 oz 10 0 V U.W Z �O MI rl 4J p O WH F LL H h p � V N W n O tf7 .i J .1 -4 } m v H ci a L w v 4 a, rx aO ++ 4J U A J � .mi °�i ro coo ro HFM 04 H 10 3NOZ w w w w H N F cli (D N V V ti ti x > y m H H ad 47 wU-I ayi � m � m ~H aNi ?• WN O "'� O w-I O d w d N A N tri N H dayy i4 fay >, H ?• ar o� ro U 41.X A UOz Z W 'Pcc m W N 0 X :1 1-1 t4 X N 0Q K w c CG� Q Q W ca r w odh N N04 3H N yS. F GAH N,4 ZLU z IL W Q C o g C 03 9 x :� W o x z a ~g N ro NO U Q d N O F [t� pop F �t OI b�O -@1 -�1M FJ. Nm w Z 1-LLIprnC7� rnt>�0� mw0 0 04. 0 0 010 W .�4 - UU)i � O `� �N0 �.0 P. oinq LL oLoQ FNA � D. caws } W co 2 N O ti 0 '1 OD I Q W lO4 tJ W f- 04 C ~ 2 IL Z a z° o � Q o W I..a Jlz N 0 0 0 0. co 0- y -4 -4 M N011113d Q T Q. 03N91S 0 0 oyO 0w _ Is m GwH O N C4 N o -+ QUS W W co c•) (n 0 0 z h Co % ID oow I N n n n n co H CD a a .� w 0 rn rn rn Z� O W Ix w N N N N N Z epi 1 N O I.- Ix c � a ti N W u) O J .1 .-c N N } m H Ix 0. d ` O �^ Ix t— ami N d C 0 a) a Fl c J .moi N ca 3 N n.O sd' N +; F:v 3 N O Z N 0 O �q 4+4. t 1 ` a7 N {'♦ N N U w ro ti m m -a k w .� N Ix A A A V �. O� N W CL W 2 w w 4i U) .moi w a 0 0 09 W^ w 1 Q d C 0 aa)i b N roV 0 �` CN N n ~ 0 H N 0 H 0 U) 14 41 O g z W -0' 40• '0� °� w � w m rn rn ay Q A� A.0 04� � 0.O'S W No U Q Q t ++w •• °C cu 4 w crN A 1 10 - cnax cavo. } W N 0; 0 O O O �O O OD m z d ~ Q W V W } � O Z Q O OL O C7 z O LUJ D W m O O O O LLK N011I13d ? y a T T w, wo 100, 03NDIS 0 0cr 0 0 0 0 0-4 v m 0 cq OWH o coco CC) N N r�i N .-d N U. W cl ce) P') M Cl) ce) aaa � o O N Z cWu coo ago co coo coo coo w cco V w -� Nay N V t7 H O Q Q N Or C o o o w o 0 0 o v7 Q a O %0 .0 .o %0 .o �o .o Z� Z O W K w O O O O n O O O O U.U. z H z 0 00 0 } s _ s c c c e e c a c v N N er W j � Y if) J F (- 10 %0 �o so l� N N N 10 �O m cc p W a o ¢ F a c W J (o .fir ti .�-1 N �0 •Ni Ul tl) 3 N0 Z P° ao w w w w co w ao aCi aoi r v 5�w co ro m m >'bOa r'oi N w z z z z JLL. �w0Nr0 a H ° a'' m U) o oro o0o 4. 4.mo az o a) ai h 0Q � v Ir 0 00 C74. 7 w 3 P. 7 W W 0 v Q o v 0 o c� o .� x J- c o w a 0ssQ asp p� sp -0 v v v v gyp°p z H Z 7 41 Q .-0i.9 0.] m.,] pl.d ..N{.1�A ++ N � � U ++ LO z U.O (D U) >tr) 14 i�10 kp HLO k N � OM C O -to o m rl 3 o m y ., .A t- .,1 ,-4 r- .1 r, co Q co A W OD w N w Cl) V4 Cl) w M w (h 0 OD �0Ix a: tawa } W .> ('A Z; O O cam') C`- [ u7 O It a w OV W !- F- Y. (n N F- Z ma C CL z Q O V o U- Q z O a W � J N O N W W N011113d o 0 0 03NO1S c T zyaF 0 0 0 N N C 6a"e N k W r-m rl- p N dam' aU) 40 u O C OOW co Z d'3E z WF- d V F-W O .o �o W o 0 0 0 O W O O O V m cr W W LL ZO O H 0 ~ 0 a o N � m � v a n W 10 O Y �- m H K a W CL O o cr !- m H �- a O v m F V -+ 14 ri O > 3NOZ ao w as m m Ory m ZW D N cr d T o N W N a b O W 2 3 `° w at G W o x W. Na O d C C u H a o rn C W aa) 0 z d" ti L H 0 ru s a s .,4 a a c ". H > o W CL � � C E N +roa > z OO 1{ p m «-1 01 W 0.9 H� ,4 2 li C N E N 3 10 0 n >,O U d w h O o � 1 o (a .i 8.o•i U) aa QaLL. Cl. } W N Z O O O O O o 00 m Q W YO. t l W H F W to LC) C) F Z a z a o O z o 4 J a N W 0 N M M K N011113d o m a, ar a) 0 ar o 0 03NDIS t: > pT T T T T C C Z W H O O O O O O O O O O W W o co m cA m o0 0+ a• M Q to OD OD W d' Cl) Cl) M M M M H W O O O O O O O O O mm N 00 OD ao OD a 00 00 It It on to OO W ��p � R i %0 i O M y CC a N V v v v v v N N F t7 Q Q H tY O .moo .moo <a 0 %0 � %0 %0 •o .p %0 .o m FF 0 W O O O O NO O M M z W W W z Ho Z C O P E CL H �c V Q Pq � N o W 0 O Y .-� O O O •-a .-� .-� O O coF tr C1 W a a o t~ F IL 4. C • J iA 0 .-a O � O% V N cn Q W x H .r � 3NOZ ao w as w as w 3 >H`� to z s U V V r Q N W ro N J ti N rl .4 0) } 0 0 t'i H ro 4 V 0 x 0 m G. C C W O ui A C •.a �p �p m x .1 ai x t� COclif ?•.+ C PR PO V•.i N V•.a d or 6 ii 8 H N t Q ~ o SHHO > '(p� •Fps ro CF ^C-I ro CF aHiA roA •.l N Q` O H 3 7'O N N �Ca'co O 0 }-i H o � cp cA �a60 Q W w N C vb N A Q .Q N W C f2. 4) g Rl C O Oq C O —4 >. C ro C co ry tl1 Z W d O O M C N .9 p E 5 ro -P ro -P 0 O -P O V IL g F Q Q a —f—4 Ns (0.9 (ASG wcn� Ntn Ncr� jNui yVj z W HM E W O O O OO 088 C m N C NM N � N Q W O �C d' ro N 00 00 ai NO a a) O ro ,1 0 O t O V ..cA U "-4 W 3C•--c 00' c:3 0% x N N =3k N cA �•-i h N h N -cnaa Sawa } N z3 Lf) O O O M C z M co r r r .0 OD m H O H LL N 10 N F z_ ri O z Q O . a O c7 � r Z p U. Q C7 ~ J 4 N C O O O 04 W W N011113d 03NDIS ID T C c °c ZMIX 0 0 O S O 0 S 0 0 S OW� W Cn 00 CO CO co CN O CO O Cl) Q Q Q d' � M M Cl) M r- -4 v V 10 O H W O O O O O O O O O O .-B N z N 7 co W 00 0D V 00 co 0D w F+ Q Q Q Q W c a U. .0 10 �o 10 .o zN ow O O O Oto O O O ra Ix W Cl) r r r r ch h r r W W z H "� z O c ro H ~ e s = c _ = F CL c u Q N V H N N N W 0 Y m O OO .�-1 O O ar � a a O ^' m D 10 U dw H OJ LO � coO C9 r�I ,N1 Pro, y OD to > W Q x 3NO2 �d z .0Cl) ctdq� 0 ro Q~� N W g �ri � 0. W z N d G� m .31 .,y . .4 0 O O v O A d r�-I r4 "q w N a ri v v A A .4 3 a a�rn z .rf 'rob 8> O O W t H .,I H in m C7 H d H N H as D FaO.,< Q a. 4L �+ `C 0p�, 4) C) 41mp,•-1 z Z W CL aHi E W p Ep EpQ o fp C E ,ss���W � A � gW F Q Q ,"i�-] tHoil ro.-1 C .d aHi � .G WpWppW�0 C cn U _ O H � H LO .fl%D Cr a% ra 00 N H O +N5a Z Q � P. a, 0..01 aol NOD 3 � 30N Rc. 0% S30l caws r W 9 ODp � W to W Z Q CL O (D O z O W CW7 ~ J O OOW O O O + N w U. N011113d T T aNi aa) 0 0 0 0 w 03NDIS > a 0 c C c W O O o N Opp Z ONW vp 00 :o rl -o LnO W W t- r- i� .o r, r O r NW w M Cl) Cl) N M m m LO M m Q 4 v p 0 O O Cls OO N 0 O 0 t�F ()Z tU) U c0 O co CO CO �.O N O U) v 4 z° � v iv ` v o Baavvv v c It 0 10 v N z o � 1 10 \0 1 w 'a a O .o 0 0 0 o ci o 0 0 OW o O 0 ON o O o o v cr W 1 WW Z H z O o0 0 1- .S f. c 1 CL p 0.Hl 0 v c a LO w H 10W p Y >, m N N N N co Cl) N N N F- n 00W O w ~ U CL w J Ch r O M N C o:) nH0 cc. Ur a7 0: O J a n 3NOZ as m w m as m w m w a IT U j ,"-�' v? c ol) aC W Z +E+ 0.u7 v w ma o ; a v ON Q O x N ~ 3 a3s C U z Q W Xc N �) 41 .1 a w •r-a� o co UH o > o• 41 H o E W O Q) o OZz d .4 to H.4 H C -1 Q 0 E s� 0 Q 0s 0\ '0 0 V C O (n O\ Z LL. e.;O H O •.a N X O O N.O H o -4 c0 -40 C w (0 O m O H O V V CD N 4' .0 LO 14 O O O N a C d w a } w } Ix w N Z Ix 4O Q W WO V w �-- N w Z a z a o 0 o O LL. cc Q C7 ~ J LL N 0 V VO ro w O -a N c N011113d o m m 03N91S c > W N N NN ON � co Z 0 1w F O uV V vn M Q N w � W Q 4 V M H w d0" VO' .Oo �a to 2 N N m Vf 00 W c*) a) ('') m N Z w N .�-a -i-) ti � n H �a a QW O tSl tP to �a0 o a a z� 0 0 0 0 0 w w -4 -4-a in W U. v U Z .(0 Z O - c _ = FO F- O � Q.CNI O N v a � V w to iia O Y F m N q w LU IL ct; 4 O n a ~ °V � U') 0 J a. 0 x q N o 3NOZ w w w w c at O N U U •L3 a Or 0 N W CL O w Z o r- 0 o C a , 3 ro ro a m p Q q H a H T H C 0r- O ..-1 Z C U B N C U E N Q' 4 -Cr1 � ~a ai N � ~ N N Z a H 'Z ej CC0 N NCH N NsH z z G 2 w a o y UCH ,� -P J-- N O XZ 0) O XZ U) O H a) CQ N ro CQ Nm = g U Z IL .14 uj w co C3.H N-4 G.1-4 H N.^a-a -+ o Cr) a) 4a O m a)w 0 m � w 0 O w .-a H � ti. o :nq a O :Y)q - cnaa Sawa City of .Fort Worth, Texas Mayor and Council Communication DATE REFERENCE SUBJECT: Assessment Paving at 13 Locations PAGE NUMBER on the South Side 7/19/65 C-546 Project No. 097-24000-136 1of 3 Council action on the project described below is requested: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Nature of Work: Assessment Paving at 13 Locations on the South Side as follows - Roadway Unit Street Limits Width R.O.W. 1) Stanley Street Butler Street south 360 feet 30 feet 50 feet dead end 2) James Street Dickson Street to Butler Street 30 " 60 " 3) Bilglade Road Wellview Ave. to Merida Avenue 36 " 50 " 4) Bilglade Road Merida Avenue to Sandage Avenue 36 " 50 " 5) Bilglade Road Sandage Avenue to McCart Street 36 " 50 " 6) Flint Street S. Henderson St. to S. Adams St. 30 " 50 " 7) Hammond Street May Street to M.K.T. Railroad 30 " 50 " 8) Thornhill Drive 80 feet west to 220 feet west of 40 " 60 " South Main Street 9) St. Louis Ave. Fogg Street to Pafford Street 26 " 40 " 10) Lomo Street N.S. Freeway Service Road to 30 " 50 " Evans Avenue 11) Lomo Street Evans Avenue to New York Avenue 30 " 50 " 12) Lomo Street New York Avenue to Cole Street 30 " 50 " 13) South Main Street Thornhill Avenue to Seminary Drive 40 " 60 " Petitions have been received for paving the above streets with the exception of Bilglade Road, Units 3, 4, and 5. Bilglade Road serves the South Hills Elemen- tary School and is the only continuous East-West street in this area connecting Trail Lake Drive and McCart Street. Approval of Units 3, 4, and 5 will provide continuous paving between Trail Lake Drive and McCart Street on Bilglade Road. Paving of these three blocks was provided for by the City Council in approval of the 1965 Capital Improvement Program (CIP A-189) . The limits of Unit No. 1, Stanley Street, were inadvertently listed incorrectly in the contract document, however, the bids have been adjusted'to extend Stanley Street a distance of 100 feet to coincide with the original petition. SUBMISSION OF BIDS The following bids were received for the paving project: Bidder Amount Bid Amount of Adjusted Bid Working Days W. E. Brittain, Inc. $ 76,823.05 $ 78,081.55 81 S.R.O. Asphalt, Inc. 78,325.95 79,622.55 81 Glade Construction Co. 81,700.60 83,028.60 81 Texas Bitulithic Co. 81,905.85 83,222.55 81 General Construction Co. 84,487.75 85,814.75 81 R. W. Gibbins, Inc. 85,186.25 86,537.75 81 DATE REFERENCE SUBJECT: ASSESSMENT PAVING AT 13 LOCATION PAGE July 19,196 NUMBER C-546 ON THE SOUTH SIDE 2 Of 3 PROJECT NO. 097-2+000-136 It is necessary that a storm drain system be installed to provide drainage at the low point on Lomo Street in the vicinity of Evans Avenue. Bids have been received for the Brentmoor Addition Storm Drain at Loma, Street, Project No. 094-28000-230. Bidder Amount Bid Working Days Lewis & Lewis, General $6,991.95 15 Contractors E. H. Shaw, Contractor 7,361.55 15 Glade Construction Co. 7,709.50 -15 L. D. Conatser, Contractor 8,012.30 15 PROJECT COST AND FINANCING: Based on the low bid, approximately $42,625.36 will be assessed against abutting property owners. The cost to the City-at-large will be approximately $43,264.35 for assessment paving and $7,700.00 for storm drainage, including engineering and miscellaneous expenses. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) That the following Bond Fund Transfers be approved: Amount From To For $43,264.35 097-24000-901, 097-24000-136 City's portion of construc- 13 Locations tion, engineering, and South Side miscellaneous expenses for assessment paving. $42,625.36 Revolving Fund 097-02497-136 Property owners' portion of 13 Locations construction cost, assess- South Side ment paving. $7,700.00 094-28000-901 094-28000-230 City's portion of construc- Unspecified Brentmoor Addition tion, engineering and Storm Drain at miscellaneous expenses for Loma Street storm drain. 2) That an ordinance be adopted: a) Declaring the necessity for and ordering the improvements on the streets as specified above; b) Making provisions for the levying of assessments; C) Directing the Public Works Department to prepare the estimates of cost and amounts proposed to be assessed; d) Awarding the contract to W. E. Brittain, Inc. , on its low bid of $78,081.55 for improvements in the project named above. DATE REFERENCE SUBJECT: ASSESSMENT PAVING AT 13 LOCATION PAGE NUMBER ON THE SOUTH SIDE July 19,1965 C-546 sa 3 or 3 PROJECT0 097-24000-136 3) That an ordinance be adopted: a) Approving the estimates of cost and amounts proposed to be assessed; b) Setting August 9, 1965, as the date of the Benefit Hearing. 4) That the contract for the construction of Brentmoor Addition Storm Drain at Lomo Street be awarded to Lewis & Lewis, General Contractors, on its low bid of $6,991.95. JLBieln The following summaries are attached: Attachment "A" - Resume of the project Attachment "B" - Distribution of cost and assessments, and result of post card survey Attachment "C" - Assessment Rolls in alphabetical order. SUBMITTED BY: DISPOSIT ON BY COUNCIL: 7.1-VIED �OTHER (DESCRIBE) PROCESSED BY CITY SECRETARY DATE CITY MANAGER