We will probably be asking the residents along that street again whether or not they would like their street paved. And again it will be their democratic right to turn us down by petition. We (Council) would like to have all the streets in Beiseker paved. Paved streets are easier to maintain, cut down on the dust, and they raise the resale values of the homes there. We would like to have the provincial streets grant program pay for them but that could take decades! That's why a local improvement is considered.
I thought I had clearly identified myself... you didn't really answer my questions though.
ReplyDeleteNow call me crazy, but if the two priorities are paving and water line repairs - why on gods green earth would town council be wanting to do those simultaneously? Fix the mains/lines first - so your not digging up our new pavement, I personally can deal with a year more of lesser pavement, rather than watch you dig a hole in fresh pavement that I'm being billed for. Patches don't stand up in our climate, so get the underground work done first.
Hey, thanx for the comments Andy. I agree with you on the "fix the pipes in the ground before we pave" thing. We will make sure, to the best of our ability, that the water and sewer services are sound before we do any more paving. We did have a booboo on 8th Street but I think we managed to fix that quite well!
DeleteAnd we'll keep working on those patches to make sure they do stand up. Municipalities are having more success with pavement patching lately and we're seeking that new knowledge.
Keep the comments coming!
Just my 2 cents but I do know that in my old community they went street by street and told everyone that year one was dig up and replace all sewer and water lines and then a year later they would be paved. They waited a year to make sure there were no breaks or issues before they spent all that money paving then having to rip it up as a patch never seems to be as good as the original. And because the residents were informed there was way less complaints. They as well were not given the choice to pave or not to pave. The town wanted a certain look to incise prospective business as well as residents that wanted to live in that type of environment. From what I've been told some complained and were told that if they were unhappy living on a paved street that the road lead out of town as well as when it led them in (think that was more live 5 cents worth)
DeleteBeiseker Village Council wishes that we could unilaterly pave the streets without a local improvement. We can't! We don't get enough provincial money to pave without asking the homeownwers along that street to pay a frontage tax on their property taxes. As soon as you announce a frontage tax, the residents MUST have the right to turn down the project! Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. That's democracy!
DeleteNo one I know in the city of Lethbridge,Calgary,Airdrie or Edmonton have ever been given the opportunity to turn down any paving that has been done on their streets. I think its crazy to have a choice...pave the damn streets and charge the frontage tax and the choice the resident has is to pay it or sell their house and move on!!! I think the way its done now is just setting us back and devaluing our property and the potential interest in growth.
DeleteHey Anony, I don't know why those folks in Lethbridge, Calgary, Airdrie or Edmonton have not exercised their rights to stop a municipal project or at least hold a referendum on it by petition. It maybe because these cities create such huge projects affecting tens of thousands of people that gathering the correct percentage on a petition is next to impossible.
DeleteEvery Albertan has the right to petition their municipal government. It is set forth in the provincial Municipal Governance Act (aka; MGA) The folks along Seventh Street here in Beiseker presented council with a proper petition. We were bound by the MGA to cancel the project.
If we had gone ahead, Alberta Municipal Affairs would have the right to disolve council and run the village themselves or hold a new election to replace us.
I'm sorry, but I just don't feel that the possible potential increase in the value of my property would offset the increase in my taxes. My house is not an investment, it's my home where I plan to spend quite a number of years. If the increase was minimal I would consider it, or perhaps if some other poster who feels it's a grand idea wouldn't mind giving me and other affected residents each $800 a year to handle the increase I'm all for it.
ReplyDelete