Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 13, 1993 <br />ASSESSMENT Hanson opened the assessment hearing for the improve- <br />HEARING ment of Costa Lane from DeSOto Street to DeSoto Street <br />IMP. NO. by storm sewer, water main, sanitary sewer, concrete <br />92-10 curb and gutter, and bituminous street construction. <br />COSTA LANE The amount proposed to be assessed is $210,105.00. <br />The City Administrator reported that this assessment <br />hearing was continued from last night in order to give <br />staff and the developer an opportunity to discuss the <br />assessment in more detail. <br />The City Engineer reported that he has reviewed unit <br />prices with the developer, and it is the developer's <br />concern that the project is not over-assessed. The <br />developer has requested that the City enter into an <br />agreement that once the project is completed, if final <br />costs are below the assessed amount, that he be <br />refunded the overage. The Engineer pointed out that <br />the assessment includes $11,890 in costs from the <br />DeSoto Street project. That project was underassessed, <br />and the City is recouping those costs in the assessment <br />of the Costa Lane project. The developer understands <br />this and has not expressed a concern with this. <br />Mr. Jespersen, 651 LaBore Road, felt that an agreement <br />to refund any costs overassessed would ensure that the <br />property owner is only paying what is necessary for the <br />project. Jespersen pointed out that the project has <br />not been completed, and the costs proposed to be <br />assessed are only estimates at this point. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that Costa Lane <br />project costs are being paid 100$ by the developer with <br />no City costs associated with the project. The <br />developer and property owner want to ensure that they <br />are not overpaying for the project, and the City wants <br />to ensure that it is not under-assessing. The <br />Administrator felt that an agreement where the property <br />owner was rebated any over-assessment was a workable <br />situation. <br />There was no one else from the general public present <br />wishing to comment on this matter. <br />Upon motion by LaValle, seconded by Morelan, the public <br />hearing was closed. <br />Mr. LaValle introduced the following resolution and <br />moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION N0. 93-10-335 - ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL <br />FOR IMPROVEMENT N0. 92-10, COSTA LANE, AND INSTRUCTING <br />THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO INFORM THE DEVELOPER IN <br />Page 19 <br />