Laserfiche WebLink
Randy Elofson stated that he has presented to the City Engineer and City <br />Attorney copies of purchase agreements for their property at $50,000/acre; <br />they are willing to take less than $50,000/acre for the easements but they <br />don't want to give away property that will benefit many along Hwy. ~10. <br /> <br />Mrs. Hamilton stated that she has also provided city staff with copies of <br />purchase agreements. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox stated that in most cases, the city has not had to pay <br />for easements and especially not when the fruits resulting from other <br />developments are being used to fund improvements. <br /> <br />Randy Elofson noted that the increased taxes derived from the subject <br />property when it develops can be used to promote development in other <br />areas. <br /> <br />Mayor Reimann stated that another option would be to forgive the road <br />assessment in exchange for donated right-of-way. <br /> <br />Randy Elofson inquired about storm sewer improvements and assessments. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka replied that there would be no storm sewer assessments for the <br />main line; property owners would be responsible for any storm sewer <br />laterals to their property. <br /> <br />Mr. Holasek stated that storm sewer should be included in the cost of the <br />street. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that a complete storm sewer system is not required upon <br />construction of the road; one pipe to the river is what is being proposed <br />and property owners would not be assessed for that. As properties fully <br />develop, the storm sewer laterals would be assessed for; past experience <br />r e f 1 e c t s t h a t c o s t t o b e a b o u t $ 7 , 0 0 0 / a c r e · <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka noted that any pipe oversizing to accommodate surrounding <br />property would be assessed. <br /> <br />¥~yor Reimann stated that he feels the City should not proceed with the <br />project if the easements are going to cost $25,000/acre. The project and <br />using MSA fund and t~: increment financing revenues benefits both the City <br />and the property owners. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pearson stated he would be in favor of forgiving the road <br />assessment in exchange for road right-of-way. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley noted tha~ exchanging assessment for right-of-way would also <br />not show up as a comparable sale and impact tax structure of adjacent <br />property. <br /> <br />Councilmember DeLuca stated that there are benefits to both the City and <br />the property owr~ers and under those circumstances he would be willing to <br />pay up to $!2,500/acre for right-of-way. <br /> <br />City Council/September 15, 1987 <br /> <br />Page 6 of 8 <br /> <br /> <br />