My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-14-2004 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
01-14-2004 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2014 8:12:41 AM
Creation date
4/30/2012 3:34:47 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The second way would be to order the improvement, build it, and wait to assess it until such time as the <br />loop is installed. For those who would hook up prior to that time, the assessment would be calculated to <br />the date in question. A connection fee in lieu of the assessment would be collected and then the property <br />owner would be shown as paid in full at the time of the actual assessment. This would be a bit easier <br />administratively, but may pose some legal problems in terms of treating properties consistently. (A <br />modification of this approach would be to treat all assessments as connection charges. The fee would <br />only be imposed when a service connection is applied for. The downside to this alternative is that we <br />would be carrying costs for a longer period of time.) <br />In addition to the poor street condition, the potential Hamel Court project creates other opportunities. <br />With MnDot's approval of accepting the majority of storm water from this area, we should be able to <br />offset some storm system costs with developer dollars saved by not building a retention pond on their <br />property. We would also offer them the opportunity to avoid duplicating costs associated with a well for <br />each property if municipal water is not available. Lastly, the construction activity associated with their <br />project will hasten the demise of the existing streets. <br />If the City Council feels staff's concepts have merit, then we would propose to put together an <br />information packet and survey to be sent to the impacted properties owners. This is in lieu of another <br />neighborhood meeting.) The survey would go out right after the Council meeting. We would present the <br />results at our next Council meeting and hopefully call for an improvement hearing to be held by the third <br />week of February. <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.