06/26/2000 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 Staff advised they proceeded with the public hearing due to the scheduling of the project. Mr. Peterson came forward and stated his appraiser indicated his property would increase in value in the amount of $5,000. The City Attorney stated residents seem to have doubts regarding the project due to the proposed assessments. He stated the issue is if residents are willing to pay that amount for utilities. The City needs to consider if appraisals should be obtained if residents are opposed to the project. Council Member Reinert stated that he understands the project is desired if the cost of assessments are the same as the increased value to the property. Mr. Dennis Gamboni, 762 Vicky Lane, asked when the project has to be done if it is not done now. Staff advised the City is in the project process now. The fact that there is development around the properties is not a factor. The City does not have a plan to provide uti r'� e to every resident. Mr. Bye came forward and clarified that the City can not asses increased. He expressed frustration regarding the City's opp his septic system has failed and can't be fixed. He state alue of the property is ning appraisals. He stated about how to proceed. Mayor Bergeson advised that assuming the C a =»rove z he assessment roll, the appraisals have to be done in 30 days. The City Attorney advised the app have to be done in 30 days. noted there is a provision i improvements out of hal a to be completed within 30 days. The appeals e apeal process if an appeal is made or not made. He er that prohibits the City can not pay for public Mr. Paul Stenger, 751 Lane, came forward and clarified that the assessment cost does not include hook up and oth costs. He noted that the appraisal will not include those costs. Staff advised the hook up charge is approximately $1,650 plus the cost of a plumber. The well may need to be capped if it is not being used. The well does not have to be removed. He reviewed the timing of the project noting that the assessment roll can be adopted in July, 2000. The project can then proceed this year weather permitting. He stated he will speak to the contractor regarding pricing and scheduling of the project. Mr. Richard Urbis, 7949 Nancy Drive, came forward and asked what will happen ten years from now if the road must be replaced. He asked if residents would be forced to put in City sewer and water and if the City would pay for part of those costs. Mayor Bergeson stated the City can not pay for roads. The cost would be assessed to property owners. The City prefers to install sewer and water when reconstructing roads. 8