04-24-2013 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL APRIL 24, 2013 of the City purchasing their property, but the question was what the value of that property was. The Administrator noted that the City could pursue option agreements on the Acosta and Boog properties as well as some agreement with the Brausen's relative to their developable land. The Administrator also pointed out the potential to transfer the option agreements on the Acosta and Boog properties to the Brausen's at the time that all three parties are ready to develop. McGraw noted that the Acosta and Boog properties abut the street in the Brausen's latest concept. McGraw asked who would pay the Acosta and Boog costs relative to the street improvement. The City Administrator indicated that if the street was put in as a public improvement, the Acosta and Boog properties would be assessed given the potential of these properties to subdivide. The Administrator noted that deferred assessments would accrue interest. Dave Brausen stated that under this new concept the property taxes for the Acosta and Boog properties should not go up because they would not have buildable lots. He indicated that they could defer improvement costs until they are ready to develop. Brausen indicated that the ghost plat and eliminating the 33 -foot road easement takes away their ability to develop their property. Brausen stated that he and his siblings have had a contract since 1998 indicating their ownership of their property. The only access into their property is via the easement and without that easement they would have to trespass to get into their site. Blesener pointed out that the Brausen's own their property, not the easement property. Blesener asked the City Planner about the City's authority to dictate street locations. The City Planner stated that a comment was made at the Planning Commission meeting that the City had the authority to put in a street wherever it wanted. The Planner stated that that was true only in the context of eminent domain. In the case of development, the location of streets is typically negotiated with a developer. Blesener asked if the City could force the road on the 33 -foot easement. The City Planner indicated that the City would have to acquire an additional 17 feet of easement in order to have a full street right -of- way. At 33 feet, the easement is inadequate for a road improvement. The City Attorney agreed with the Planner's comments. The City Administrator again pointed out that if Acosta and Boog were assessed for improvements and that assessment deferred, interest would accrue on the deferred assessment. The Administrator pointed out that someone would have to carry the costs to the Acosta and Boog properties. The Administrator also commented that under the Brausen concept presented this evening, it appears that the Acosta property is subdividable, 8