05-27-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

May 27,2014 options for the cost shadng improvements for consideration. Senior Engineering Supervisor Schlichting recommended the Council select Option 3 for future consideration of a new Innsbruck Pond Taxation District, including single family and townhome properties that back up to Innsbruck Park combined with a larger City contribution. Public Works Director'Wyffels indicated the Council was being asked to simply select an option this evening and the City would then have to re-notify the property owners before the new taxation district could be approved. Councilmember Burg thanked staff for responding to her questions prior to this evenings meeting. She recommended the Council carefully consider the City's contribution to this taxing district, as she did not want to see a precedence set if the City provided over 25o/o. Councilmember Bauman commented this was a unique district due to the fact the City owned a portion of the property surrounding the pond. For that reason, she could support a larger contribution from the City. Councilmember Burg requested comment on the expense of the fountain. Senior Engineering Supervisor Schlichting discussed the amount that would be spent on a fountain and pump in detail with the Council. Councilmember Bauman questioned if a fountain was necessary for Innsbruck Pond. Senior Engineering Supervisor Schlichting reported the petitioners were requesting the aesthetics be improved and would provide a visual improvement to the pond area. Máyor Jacobsen inquired how many additional ponds the City had that could be created into taxátion districts. Public Works Director Wyffels estimated there were less than ten ponds in the City that could be created into taxation districts. Senior Engineering Supervisor Schlichting noted that the residents surrounding Innsbruck Pond have collected enough money to have the pond treated chemically twice in20l4. Public Works Director Wyffels commented if the Council was concerned about setting precedence, the Council could create a policy stating if a pond is not in a park the City contribution will be 25o/o and if a pond is located in a City park, the City contribution will be no more than35Yo. Councilmember Jacobsen supported the policy proposed by staff, in addition to Option 3 for Innsbruck Pond. Councilmember Strub agreed stating this was reasonable' Councilmember Bauman supported Option 3, with the increased contribution due to the fact the City owned a portion of property surrounding this pond. She did not support the proposed fountain, Councilmember Burg stated the City could elect to contribute to the chemical treatments and forego contributing to the fountain as this was simply for aesthetics as the City did not typiðally put fountains within its parks. She did want to see the pond chemically treated this year.-City Atto^ey LeFevere commented that staff needed guidance on the contribution level of the City in order to properly inform residents as to their expense for the pond improvements. Mayor Jacobsen understood the fountain could be a maintenance headache but if the residents wit|in the taxation district were willing to pay for the additional expense the Council should allow this to continue. Motionby CouncilmemberJacobsen, seconded by CouncilmemberBurgto recommend the City make a 25o/o conffibution to ponds without a City park and an amount not to exceed 357o for ponds with a Citypark Councilmember Burg statedabubblercouldbe anotheroptionforthepond, versusthe fowrtain, andthismay require less maintenance, Senior Engineering Supervisor Schlichting reported a bubbler may not be conducive given the depth of this pond. He explained the residents surrounding this pond were extremely interested in the aesthetics of the pond and for this reason, have suggested a PageSofll