Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003 <br />Regular Meeting Page 5 <br /> <br /> 1 <br />MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Approve Consent Agenda Item C as Presented. 2 <br /> 3 <br /> Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 4 <br /> 5 <br />Council Member Stigney indicated he disagreed with the policy as proposed because it would 6 <br />change how the City assesses for street improvements to a unit basis rather than per front 7 <br />footage. He then said that he does not feel it is fair to make those with smaller lots pay the same 8 <br />as those with larger lots. 9 <br /> 10 <br />MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Approve Consent Agenda Item F as Presented. 11 <br /> 12 <br />Council Member Marty indicated that Council has been told that this method seems to be more 13 <br />equitable for individual homeowners. 14 <br /> 15 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated that for a neighborhood reconstruction you make the 16 <br />assumption that all houses are of the same dollar value and mostly the same size and the City’s 17 <br />ordinance states that the per unit method is advantageous with the same dollar amount. 18 <br /> 19 <br />Council Member Marty indicated the City has had an issue with corner lots and how to handle 20 <br />the assessments. He then asked if people with double lots that could be subdivided are charged 21 <br />for one unit or two. 22 <br /> 23 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated that, if there are two lots, the residents are charged for two 24 <br />even if there is only one house on the lot. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Council Member Stigney reiterated that he feels the benefit is to those residents with the larger 27 <br />lots and it is not a fair deal for everyone. He then said that there are variations in the lot sizes in 28 <br />his neighborhood. 29 <br /> 30 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated that the formula also assumes that all single family 31 <br />residences generate the same amount of traffic and that is another reason to treat them the same. 32 <br /> 33 <br /> Ayes – 4 Nays – 1(Stigney) Motion carried. 34 <br /> 35 <br />Council Member Gunn asked where the City’s portion of the matching grant would come from. 36 <br /> 37 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated the funds would come out of the forestry budget. 38 <br /> 39 <br />Council Member Gunn asked what the funds would normally be used for. 40 <br /> 41 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated that in the past the City has gotten a grant for oak wilt 42 <br />control but that is not available to the City anymore. 43 <br /> 44 <br />MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Approve Consent Agenda Item G as Presented. 45