My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 02-06-1978
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1978
>
CC 02-06-1978
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/24/2024 9:35:06 AM
Creation date
11/27/2006 10:26:16 AM
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.
/
43
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 />,� MR. POPOVICHe "I can see it from your point of view. From <br />the pure legal point of view it's hard for us to commit ourselves <br />to any dollars when you don't have bids - the job hasn't been <br />done. That's why the statute contemplates two hearings - one <br />on feasibility and one on assessments, but that you just don't <br />do the two together, and so, I'm only going by the statute. <br />Obviously if parties can agree and it works out that way, fine. <br />But I've never recommended it and I've seen these tentative <br />agreements fall apart if something went haywire down the line <br />and something came up you hadn't contemplated no matter how <br />much good will there is on the part of both sides. There has <br />to be mutual trust in the sense as to what you're trying to <br />accomplish and what the city is trying to accomplish unless <br />the parties have an idea one is trying to get the other." <br />COUNCILMAN WINGERT: '�GJhat precedent is there for establish- <br />ing the benefit of a street. Is there some way to do this, and <br />what's it based on?" <br />MR. POPOVICH: "I'd want to review some of the <br />have come up (inaudible) the use by the community at <br />versus the immediate people surrounding it." <br />� <br />cases that <br />large <br />COUNCILMAN WINGERT: "On a traffic basis - cars per hour - <br />something like that?" <br />MR. POPOVICHe "The problem you have is, up until now - <br />and a Supreme Court case just came down a week ago on Southview <br />Country Club on anticipate use, and I haven't read that case. <br />I've been out of town and I just saw the announcement of it. <br />But normally, it's the benefit to the property before and <br />after, so when we give an assessment - for instance, he's got <br />$4B4O00 being assessed out of the total against his particular <br />piece of property. Technically there's got to be an inerease <br />in the market value of his property. If there isn't an increase <br />in market value, and the matter becomes a contested thing and <br />is tried as an appeal from the assessment (inaudible) in the <br />appraisal. That's why I asked - is he opposed in the sense it's <br />been presented, because this is the worst possible picture, and <br />he gave his answer that you heard. If it's an improveaent that's <br />put in for a small localized area - which this one tends to be - <br />because primarily it's (inaudible) that takes care of Flaherty <br />and the other property surrounding, but I would want to do <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.