My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 02-01-1982
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1982
>
CC 02-01-1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:12:21 PM
Creation date
11/10/2006 2:38:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />" <br /> <br />MR. EIBENSTEINER: Will the Council tell me this evening, <br />or at a later date, if they'll share in the cost of the street <br />or if it's absolutely my cost? When will I find that out? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MAYOR WOODBURN: Legally, we don't know until the assess- <br />ment hearing, as Mr. Popovich has indicated. <br /> <br />MR. POPOVICH: We're going on the basis of 100% assessed - <br />that you were going to pay it all. You want to go on that <br />basis in making your response. Now, whether the Council deter- <br />mines to put part of it on general taxes or part of it out of <br />some other fund and then just assess - I've seen 90j10, 80/20 - <br />80% assessed, 20% on taxes - it varies. But itJs your job to <br />convince the Council. Our recommendation is that you're <br />developing the land, it's your land, that normally developers <br />pay 100%. <br /> <br />MR. EIBENSTEINER: <br />the plat is approved? <br />the assessment hearing <br /> <br />will I find out at a later date, when <br />Or can I find out ahead of time, before <br />next fall? <br /> <br />MAYOR WOODBURN: I think as a practical matter the Council <br />has commonly had an idea of which way they're going before <br />the assessment hearing. They have to in order to judge the <br />feasibility of it. That idea is not a legal idea and is not <br />binding, but it's an assumption of the way things could go to <br />make it feasible, if it should be feasible. In other words, we <br />will, I presume, have some idea of the feasibility of this <br />based on what you're saying, which reflects then into the <br />financing of it at the time we approve the plat. That is an <br />idea and it's not binding and I'm sure that you're aware of <br />that. It never has been in anything that you do, except some <br />things have been a little clearer cut. I don't know how to <br />answer it any better than that. I expect we'll have an idea <br />of which way we'll go. You're telling us that $l2,700 would <br />be feasible - that's the cul-de-sac. <br /> <br />e. <br /> <br />MR. EIBENSTEINER: I was figuring half the cul-de-sac <br />price. The cul-de-sac price right now is $20,000. I figured <br />$10,000 plus the regular assessment. At the same time, I <br />was going to cut the storm sewer down to $23,000 from $45,000. <br />I have to work that out with Don. I just don't like to spend <br />storm sewer money when no water goes down the storm sewer. <br />I have a place on Nursery Hill Court right now, I put a lot <br />of money in Nursery Hill Court and there's a storm sewer there <br />that never drains water. I want to make sure this project <br />doesn't end up the same way. I can live with half the cul-de- <br />sac. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: Before we can go with this tonight, <br />I guess I'd like to get a little bit more into the storm <br />sewer drainage to find out what this is all about. <br /> <br />MR. BOB VOSIKA, 4268 Norma Avenue: I have a question <br />related to the land use within the park, for either the <br /> <br />16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.