Laserfiche WebLink
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 />