Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />MARCH 21, 1994 <br />based on assessable footages as determined through <br />application of the policy provisions. The <br />Administrator felt this would be clearer by eliminating <br />the last sentence in Section F.1.b. Council agreed. <br />The Administrator reviewed the paragraph on <br />reconstructed urban streets in his March 18th memo, <br />pointing out that the City has not reconstructed any <br />urban streets. This will be an issue in the future and <br />one that the Council needs to think about. <br />Council discussed the application of the corner lot <br />provision of the policy, and how addresses are <br />determined. Morelan felt that an address should be <br />determined by the location of the driveway. The City <br />Administrator assumed that address was determined by <br />the Building Official by orientation of the house. <br />The Administrator pointed out that F.i.f.(2)ii. was <br />inconsistent with the policy and needed to be cleaned <br />up. <br />John Yonker asked if drainage was an issue in <br />determining property address. <br />The Council pointed out that on a corner lot a driveway <br />would typically be placed on the long side of the lot. <br />Therefore, determining address by driveway location for <br />assessment purposes most likely will result in a <br />property being assessed on its longest frontage, <br />subject to the policy's 125 foot maximum. Council <br />questioned whether this would be an equitable <br />situation. <br />Pedersen felt it typical for the actual property <br />address to be the short side of the lot, with driveways <br />being located on the long side of the lot. Pedersen <br />felt that if the City used the actual property address <br />for determining assessable frontage, in most cases it <br />would be the shorter side of the property. <br />Hanson thanked those members of the general public <br />present for the attendance at tonight's workshop <br />meeting. <br />15 <br />