Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 21, 2008 <br />and Johnson properties. However, in the case of the Johnson property, <br />development of the Sculley property would have to occur first. <br />There was no one else present wishing to comment on this matter. <br />The City Administrator read into the record a letter dated October 20, <br />2008 from Gerald and Norma Battista, 951 Beam Avenue, objecting to the <br />amount of their assessment. <br />With regard to the assessment of the Battista property, the City <br />Administrator reported that the property has minimal frontage on Beam <br />Avenue. 'this property, however, would have been assessed once a <br />connecting street is improved providing access into the LaBore Road <br />properties, or could have been assessed based on the City's odd-shaped lot <br />formula both of which would have resulted in a higher street assessment. <br />The City Administrator indicated that staff feels that assessing street costs <br />as proposed on a per unit assessment was the most equitable for the <br />neighborhood. While the property has minimal frontage on Beam, it has <br />the same traffic utilization as the other Beam Avenue lots. He also noted <br />that if the Battista's had been assessed on a front foot basis with a 75-foot <br />minimum, this assessment for the street would have been about $1,200 <br />less, but they would still have the full watermain assessment. It would not <br />have been reduced to the $4,348 as indicated in their objection letter. The <br />Administrator reported that staff recommends denial of the assessment <br />appeal. <br />Upon motion by Allan, seconded by McGraw, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br />Ms. Allan introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOL UTION NO. 2008-IO-259 -DENYING THE ASSESSMENT <br />OBJECTION FILED BY GERALD AND NORMA BATTISTA FOR <br />THEIR PROPERTYAT 951 BEAMAVENUE BASED ON THE FACT <br />THAT THE BENEFITS RECEIVED EXCEEDS THE AMOUNT OF <br />THE ASSESSMENT PROPOSED AND IS A FAIR AND EQUITABLE <br />ASSESSMENT OF THIS PROPERTY <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by McGraw. <br />Ayes (4). <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />