Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />City Engineer Raatikka recommended that the alignment for extension of <br />sewer and water south of Hwy. #10 be revised to follow the Rwy. #10 right- <br />of-way. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox stated that the most advantageous alignment would have <br />been in the future MSA road alignment; in fairness to those affected <br />property owners. changing the alignment should be delayed for a short <br />period so additional negotiations for easements can take place. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Cox and seconded by Councilmember Pearson to <br />authorize City Staff to continue negotiations until December 3. 1987 for <br />easements for the extension of sewer and water south of Hwy. #10 in the <br />future MSA road alignment; the figure to be negotiated should be <br />considerably less than the appraised value of $25.000/acre; if negotiations <br />produce no positive results by December 3. 1987. the City Engineer is <br />authorized to amend the feasibil ity report and move tbe proj ec t forward <br />utilizing the Rwy. #10 right-of-way as tbe alignment. <br /> <br />Further Discussion; Mayor Reimann inquired if this extending sewer and <br />water to the south side of Hwy. #10 includes extending services east. Mr. <br />Raatikka replied that the project only includes services to the south side <br />of Hwy. #10 and then west. Councilmember Cox stated that there have been <br />requests for services to the east and a project of that nature should be <br />placed on tbe next council agenda. Councilmember DeLuca stated that staff <br />should have more direction to negotiate witb other than 'considerab ly less <br />tban $25,000'; tbrough all negotiations. the city has never really made a <br />dollars and cents offer; Councilmember Cox stated that staff should take <br />into consideration that lots in Riverside West have recently sold for <br />approximately $lO.OOO/acre. Mr. Hartley reaffirmed that be and the City <br />Attorney need more refined direction from council with regards to a <br />s.tisfactory offer. Councilmember Cox stated that sales in Riverside West <br />reflect improved lots selling at $10.000/acre; deducting $5,000 for the <br />cost of improvements results in a raw land value of $5.000/acre based on <br />comparable sales. Mr. Hartley requested that the time period in tbe motion <br />be extended to December 7 (the day before Council's regular meeting on <br />December 8) and Council agreed. Councilmember DeLuca tbat a beginning <br />negotiating figure, even if it is law. gives negotiations a starting point. <br />Councilmember Cox noted that with development. developers provide the right- <br />of-way and pay for the streets and improvements; tbe improvements in tbis <br />particular area are being funded by revenues tbe city obtains from <br />development in anotber area and any offer above '0' for easementssbould be <br />considered as a bonus by those property owners. Councilmember Cox referred <br />to the letter from Winslow Holasek submitted during Citizn Input denying be <br />said he would never accept less than $50.0~O/acre arid stated be beard Mr. <br />Eolasek make tbose same comments at public meetings. Councilmember DeLuca <br />stated that staff needs a definite price starting point in order to itivite <br />counter-offers. Councilmember Cox replied that the starting point sbould <br />be $0. Mr. Rartley stated that he and Mr. Goodrich will continue to <br />negotiate for easements and report back to Council with a figure that seems <br />to be the most reasonable and acceptable to the property owners; at that <br />point. Council can make a decision.de4-. Councilmember Cox statec that tbe city <br />is trying to come up with an affordable resolutio.. to the situation; this <br />case has the potential to set a precedent for future similar projects. <br />Councilmember Pearson stated that he understands that tbe property owners <br />City Council/November 24. 1987 <br /> <br />Page 9 of 16 <br /> <br />lIB <br />