04/28/1997 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 28, 1997 paying the current cost for service. Mr. Ahrens said this prevents residents from buying something at what it cost, say, ten years ago. Ms. McCluskey asked why the improvements are not extended into an adjacent area and whether it would be cheaper to wait until the entire area is served. She stated she was told that this would be cheaper. Ms. McCluskey also asked why this entire process was started when it was not petitioned. Mr. Ahrens explained the Council could decide to limit the area of service but cannot expand it beyond what was included in the feasibility report. He estimated there may be a minimal saving if this project was extended one more block. Ms. McCluskey raised the option of extending the improvement down Sunset Road. Mr. Powell explained there are no trunk utilities off Sunset Road and if those property owners petitioned for service, the alignment would be the same. It was noted service could be provided from the City of Blaine, if approved by them. With regard to economy of scale, Mr. Powell explained there can be a cost savings but it is a matter of where you stop the project to gain an economy of scale. He noted since this is not a petitioned improvement, a 4/5's majority vote of the Council is required to proceed. Diana Turner, 7404 Sunset Road, asked if this is ever presented again, will residents have the opportunity to address SAC charges at an R-1 lot rate. Mr. Ahrens explained this was proposed by staff but if it is turned down, a future project may be in a different form or operating under a different Assessment Policy. Ms. Turner asked if this is the cheapest proposal that will be offered. Mr. Ahrens stated his goal was to provide the cheapest option to residents that was still in the best interest of the City. He believes that goal was met. There being no further public input, Mayor Landers requested Council direction as to whether the public hearing should be closed or continued. Council Member Kuether asked if the public hearing should be closed if the Council wants appraisals conducted. Mr. Powell explained that closing the public hearing will trigger the waiting period and time Council has to act. Mr. Ahrens advised that between 60 days and one year, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council must make a decision on the project. He noted the Council has up to one year to make a determination and appraisals can be conducted within that time period. City Attorney Hawkins clarified the public hearing must remain open for sixty days to allow residents to file petitions. Based on the input received tonight (majority in opposition), he questioned the wisdom of spending funds to obtain appraisals. If a petition of 51% in opposition is submitted, the project cannot proceed. An unidentified resident noted a petition has already been circulated and signed so he does not see the need to spend funds to send out cards to determine whether residents are for or against the project. He asked if this petition carries any weight with the Council. PAGE 8