Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />September 23, 1986 <br /> <br />Public Hearings <br /> <br />Before the Public Hearings began, Rutherford reviewed the <br />procedures for the assessing of all the assessment projects: If <br />the assessments are adopted this evening, residents will have <br />thirty days to payoff the assessment without interest or the <br />assessment will be applied to real estate taxes; for Projects <br />84-2, 85-4, 86-8, and 86-10 staff proposes an assessment rate of <br />10-1/2% per year on the unpaid balance; for Projects 84-2, 85-4, <br />and 86-8 staff is proposing an eight year collection period, and <br />a ten year collection period for Project 86-10; the first <br />installment of the assessments will appear on the 1986 tax state- <br />ment bearing approximately 16 months' interest for the time <br />period of September 1986 to December 1987. <br /> <br />Rutherford stated special hearings were held on Projects 84-2 <br />and 85-4 last year as a result of residents objections the <br />proposed assessments the two projects were deferred to the <br />Citizen Study Committee. The two questions raised were: Should <br />curbing be assessed on minor arterial roads; and should projects <br />with minimal cost be assessed at all. The Committee determined <br />that curbing assessments on minor arterials is justified because <br />there is land access (on collector streets, the oversizing is <br />paid for with state aid funds). <br /> <br />Rutherford stated the proposals for special assessments are <br />approximately $200 for a typical residential lot on Silver Lake <br />Road and approximately $450 per residential lot on County Road D <br />which represents the private access share of the total cost; <br />stated the amount of the assessment and the number of properties <br />being assessed should be considered as well as the project cost; <br />and, if these two projects are not special assessed against <br />adjacent properties, they would have to be paid for by a general <br />city tax levy against all properties in the city. <br /> <br />Rutherford continued that both the Citizen Study Committee and <br />the Financial Policy Advisory Board had studied the questions <br />and recommended the assessments of these properties be levied as <br />proposed. <br /> <br />Rutherford reviewed Project 84-2, the upgrading and widening of <br />Country Road D by Ramsey County from Silver Lake Road to I-35W, <br />which included widening the road from two lanes to four lanes, <br />installation of curb and gutter, storm sewer, and sidewalk. <br />Also included was the widening of the bridge over I-35W for <br /> <br />Page Two <br /> <br />Public Hearings <br /> <br />Project 84-2: County <br />Road D <br />Resolution 86-91 <br />7:42-7:57pm <br />