02-11-1997 Charter Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

JOINT CHARTER COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 1997 Mr. Horn explained the proposed street construction standards and techniques. Based on these assumptions, cost estimates were determined as follows: Phase 1 of$1.9 million; Phase 2 of$1.6 million; Phase 3 of$1.5 million; Phase 4 of$2.1 million; and Phase 5 of$1.9 million. Mr. Ahrens reviewed the rules by which the City must abide with regard to assessment of public improvement projects in that the amount of assessment cannot exceed the value of improvement to the property. He explained how front foot assessments were calculated and advised they are as follows: Phase 1 is $90/foot; Phase 2 is $80/foot; Phase 3 is $100/foot; Phase 4 is $70/foot; and Phase 5 is $100/foot. Commissioner Solfest asked if 100% of the improvement costs will be covered by assessments. Mr. Ahrens explained that is the basis for this presentation. Commissioner Solfest stated his understanding is that it is typical to assess 30%. Mr. Hawkins agreed this may be the amount which could be sustained as property value improvement. Mr. Ahrens reviewed the percentage assessed by several other cities, ranging between 25% to 50% of the improvement cost. Chair Montain inquired regarding a cost discrepancy. Mr. Ahrens explained one set of figures identify construction costs only, without the extra 30% for engineering and other associated costs. Commissioner Solfest asked if the amount to actually be assessed will be about one- third of those being presented with the remaining two-thirds needing to be financed by the City. Mr. Ahrens stated this is correct and financing could include use of MSA funds. He noted a typical lot is estimated at 80 feet which results in an estimated assessment of$6,400 to $8,000 using the basis of assessing at 100% of the project cost. Mr. Ahrens then reviewed a proposed street reconstruction schedule assuming the project is City initiated by the Council on March 10, 1997. He explained a specific feasibility report would need to be prepared for each individual phase including soil borings, drainage problems, determination if utilities are adequate or in need of repair, etc. This feasibility study could be received by the Council on May 12, 1997, and the public hearing scheduled for June 23, 1997. Mr. Ahrens explained that as part of this study, a financing scenario would be prepared and presented. Once the public hearing is closed, the petitioning process will begin. No action can be taken by the City Council until the 60 day "window" has expired. If the majority of the residents petition against the project, it would probably not proceed at that time. However, if the petition supports the improvement, an election would be held within 120 days of the close of the public hearing, or October 15, 1997. Mr. Ahrens explained how these dates could be slightly adjusted considering the upcoming election to be held in November of 1997. If the project proceeds, plans and PAGE 2