Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />City Council <br />April 7, 1993 <br />Morelan felt that it would be unfair to divide up the cost <br />of an assessment between many people on one side of the <br />street and only a few on the other side. LaValle again <br />stated that single family homes usually have more drivers <br />living in each unit than multiple family homes. He <br />questioned how the wear of the street could be measured when <br />considering that fact. The Administrator felt that there <br />should be some way to equate the ratio of use of a street <br />between a single family home and multiple family dwelling. <br />The Engineer felt that if the assessment on multiple family <br />dwellings is raised too high, it would drive the residents <br />right out of their homes. He felt that those residents are <br />looking for affordable housing. <br />Scalze stated that she felt bad for the single family homes <br />on Demont who were assessed the same as the multiples on <br />that street. 5he stated that they felt they were <br />discriminated against and were very upset with the Council. <br />Pedersen felt that multiples are a business in that someone <br />is making money on them. He felt that unless they are owner <br />occupied, they should be considered commercial. Pedersen <br />asked how someone would be assessed if they had a very long <br />driveway off a street, but no front footage. The Engineer <br />stated that the resident would most likely be assessed using <br />the minimum frontage requirement. The Engineer felt the <br />policy should be set up to be fair to everyone affected by <br />the improvement. <br />Mayor Hanson stated that the Council must now determine what <br />will be set as a ratio for Vanderbie/Allen and Costa Lane <br />projects. The City Administrator felt that the Council <br />should concentrate on basic items such as corner lots to <br />come to an agreement on those issues first. Depending on <br />how those types of situations are handled will impact <br />assessable footage figures and, therefore, the financial <br />obligation of the affected parties. The Engineer stated <br />that the new policy has tried to clean up and clarify <br />problems that have occurred in the past. He felt that as <br />the Council reviews the policy, they should keep in mind <br />residential verses commercial rates. <br />The City Administrator felt that the first three pages of <br />the policy were straight forward. He stated that the <br />"special cases" clause on page 9, number 7 was a key phrase <br />that was added to the policy. On page 9, A1, the section on <br />project initiation spells some things out that are not <br />-8- <br />