Loading...
Memo- Action on Assesment Objections Adopt Assesment Roll Interlachen Park St ImprovementsObjections Concerning Project 97 -12 City of Hopkins Memorandum Date: May 14, 1998 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Gessele, Engineering Supt. Subject: Action on Assessment Objections Adopt Assessment Roll Interlachen Park Street Improvements Staff is providing a compilation of all assessment objections submitted for Council review and action. This is done so no confusion should arise. Originally two objections were included in Council Report 98 -67, an additional ten objections were put in memo form and presented to Council at the May 5 meeting, and at the hearing another seven were submitted for review. 1. Address: 1318 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,472.00 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason of cost to homeowner, no perceived need for a project, and that street repairs and maintenance should be funded out of general revenues. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is improper, that 100% funding of street reconstruction from general funds would be unfair to residents in several other neighborhoods where the City participated with a 30 % -40% share of the costs. 2. Address: 235 Holly Road Assessed Amount: $5,508.00 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by lengthy list of reasons attached. (See notice of objection form.) Recommendation: Deny appeal on the basis that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is illegal or improper or that the City violated provisions of Minn. Statutes 429.061 or 429.081 in carrying out its special assessment procedures. May 14, 1998 Page 2 3. Address: 265 Holly Road Assessed Amount: $4,406.40 Appeal for senior citizen deferment and cancellation of assessment by reason that the project is unnecessary and will increase taxes. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that City conducted extensive pavement condition surveys to verify need of doing street reconstruction. Staff has attempted to contact resident concerning qualifications for senior citizen deferment but had no success. 4. Address: 1326 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,472.00 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason that streets are in satisfactory condition and assessments are too high. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that City conducted extensive pavement condition surveys to verify need of doing street reconstruction and that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is improper. 5. Address: 1402 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,483.18 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason that the project is perceived to be roadway repairs in general and resident does not understand why repairs are assessed in some cases and not in others. Recommendations: Deny appeal on basis that City has a well - established and clearly detailed roadway construction policy that defines overlay projects as repair /maintenance (non- assessed) and pavement removal /regrading /pavement replacement as reconstruction (assessed). Preston Lane at the appellant's address is being reconstructed. 6. Address: 1409 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,511.13 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason that project is not needed, that the City did not maintain the street in 1997, and that assessment amounts are excessive. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that City conducted extensive pavement condition surveys to verify need of doing street project, that maintenance was not performed in 1997 only after it was determined that repairs or reconstruction were needed, and that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is improper. May 14, 1998 Page 3 7. Address: 201 Holly Road Assessed Amount: $4,406.40 Appeal for cancellation of assessment, no reason given. Recommendation: Deny appeal. 8. Address: 1417 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,511.13 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason the resident does not understand why the project is assessed in some cases and not in others and that the City did not maintain the street in 1997. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that City has a well - established and clearly detailed roadway construction policy that defines overlay projects as repair /maintenance (non- assessed) and pavement removal/regrading /pavement replacement as reconstruction (assessed), and that maintenance was not performed the previous year only after it was determined that repairs or reconstruction were needed. 9. Address: 1517 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $5,609.01 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason that assessments are excessively high and no benefits from the project are perceived. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is improper or that no benefit is derived. 10. Address: 1410 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,505.54 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason that assessments are excessively high, that the street was not maintained the previous year, and resident perceives no benefit arising from project. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is improper or that no benefit is derived, that maintenance was not performed the previous year only after it was determined that repairs or reconstruction were needed. May 14, 1998 Page 4 11. Address: 1418 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,511.13 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason that no benefit is perceived, that street reconstruction is not necessary, and that street was not adequately maintained in last two years. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that no substantive evidence is offered that no benefit is derived, that the City conducted extensive pavement condition surveys to verify need of doing street reconstruction, and that maintenance was not performed the previous year only after it was determined that repairs or reconstruction were needed. 12. Address: 1319 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,751.50 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason that sewer repairs are driving the need for rebuilding the street and the utility should fund the costs, that the street project is not necessary, and that there are no current drainage issues on Preston Lane. Recommendation: Deny appeal on the basis that the need for street reconstruction is the driving force behind the project and not the repair of sanitary sewer mains, that the City conducted extensive pavement condition surveys to verify need of doing street reconstruction, and that although there may be no ponded water on Preston Lane, the street's flat grade promotes wet base materials on the road's edge and thus edge cracking. 13. Address: 234 Holly Road Assessed Amount: $6,609.60 Appeal for cancellation or revision of assessment by reason that assessments are too high and unfair when compared to previous City projects. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is improper or unfair. 14. Address: 1425 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,511.13 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason that value of owner's property would not increase by an amount in excess of the City's cost for mill and overlay procedures on other streets. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that no substantive evidence is offered that no benefit is derived from the project. May 14, 1998 Page 5 15. Address: 1509 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,478.15 No appeal category was chosen. The resident commented that assessments were unreasonable in relation to benefits gained. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is improper. 16. Address: 1501 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,511.13 Appeal for cancellation of assessment by reason that street reconstruction is unnecessary and that assessments are unfair and too high. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that City conducted extensive pavement condition surveys to verify need of doing street reconstruction, that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is improper or unfair. 17. Address: 1401 Preston Lane Assessed Amount: $4,483.18 Appeal for cancellation or revision of assessment by reason that assessments are too high. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that no substantive evidence is offered that the assessment amount is improper. 18. Address: 255 Holly Road Assessed Amount: $6,216.33 Appeal for cancellation or revision of assessment by reason that utility repairs are driving street reconstruction and the utility should fund the costs and that no benefit is provided by the street project. Recommendation: Deny appeal on basis that the need for street reconstruction is the driving force behind the project and not utility repairs and that no substantive evidence is offered that no benefit is derived. 19. Address: 241 Holly Road Assessed Amount: $4,957.20 Appeal for revision of the assessment. No reason was given. May 14, 1998 Page 6 Recommendation: Grant appeal based on staff recommended Council action to amend the City's current assessment policy to provide a cap on per -foot assessments. Staff suggests that Council act on the objections taking the recommended action in each case. Council can take collective action with one motion to cover all objections. Assessment Roll Considerable discussion was held at the May 5 assessment hearing concerning assessment amounts. Council heard and discussed all objections and closed the hearing proceedings. The decision was made to delay action on the objections and adoption of the roll until further information was gathered for review at the May 12 Council Workshop. Two memos are attached which were the basis for discussions at that meeting. Most objections centered on the proposed assessment amounts. Staff then prepared a spreadsheet summarizing past assessments from 1990 -1998 for an overview of a working policy that has been successful except in the case of Project 97 -12. Staff recommended that Council could in this case retain its current policy but add a condition that per foot assessments be capped at 120% of the average assessment on the previous three similar street reconstruction projects. Following that recommended line, it was determined that the maximum per foot assessment on Preston Lane and Holly Road would be $44.60. Council gave direction to pursue this option. Attached you will find amended assessment rolls that reflect the above option. This information has been sent to all the residents. With adoption of these rolls the City will have assumed an additional $35,601.02 in project costs. After the Council Work Session a resident requested that staff consider funding the cost of the additional road excavation necessitated by street grade changes to the storm sewer utility. The resident felt that the street grades were being modified in order to improve the effectiveness of the new storm sewer pipes and inlets. Therefore, the additional excavation costs should be funded from the storm sewer utility, not as a part of the assessable street reconstruction costs. It is true that the new storm sewer inlets will function more effectively with the proposed new street grades. It is not uncommon for street grade adjustments to be made on any street reconstruction project, even a street with existing curbing and inlets, to improve the street drainage and/or other contributing area drainage. However, these grade changes ultimately benefit the street design and function by eliminating standing water. Therefore, staff believes the best approach is to limit storm sewer utility funding to the costs associated with installing pipes, inlets, culvert pipes, storm sewer manholes, and the like. The estimated subgrade excavation costs attributed to the proposed street grades on Preston Lane and Holly Road at $2,275 and $915, respectively. Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move that Council adopt Resolution 98 -25. Resolution for Adoption of the Assessment Roll, Project 97 -12, Interlachen Park Street Improvements under the following conditions: 1. The original final assessment roll shall be amended to reflect a cap on the per foot assessment at 120% of the average of the previous three similar street reconstruction projects. 2. Staff will provide an amended assessment policy for Council action within one month. Such amended policy shall reflect the above provisions. ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT .NO. Address of Assessed Parcel , c Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: What assessment does this concacf .� � ' 117 � 003 Property Identification Number: ___L,---- Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? ( ) Yes ( ) No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. (print name) (signature (date) �i / 6 /,1iVt (2Z) (9 (address of property owner) telephone ��►� -� / v Zip y`° 3 • ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. ' 77 - 1 2.. Address of Assessed Parcel 236 mill Aec What assessment does this concern '6 St fri f7 ve.- C S 5, ' ° !) Property Identification Number: I _ _ z Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a . ( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. s -v. 14 • 14.L k (print name) 13 3 Yalt 80.& (address of property / ti1 � �'I owner) Lig Oo G � (L) Yes ( ) No telephone zip '3 y3 / /-Zf - 7? (signature) (date) % 3 (6 /Z- PS-/7 e6 LEVANDER, GILLEN & MILLER, P. A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW April 29, 1998 Hopkins City Clerk Hopkins City Hall 1010 First Street South Hopkins, MN 55343 RE: Interlachen Park Special Assessments 235 Holly Road Dear City Clerk: Enclosed please find a completed. "Assessment Hearing Appeal Form" with an attached Notice of Objection to Proposed Assessment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 451 -1831. Very truly yours, Stephen H. Fochler SHF:cj Enclosures RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED ROGER C. MILLER TIMOTHY J. KUNTZ DANIEL J. BEESON ROLLIN H. CRAWFORD KENNETH J. ROHLF TONETTA T. DOVE STEPHEN H. FOCHLER * JAY P. KARLOVICH ANGELA M. LUTZ AMANN KORINE L. LAND ANN C. O'REILLY 633 SOUTH CONCORD STREET SUITE 400 • SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55 612 -451 -1831 FAX: 612 - 45 HAROLD LEVANDER , 1910 -I992 * ARTHUR GILLEN RETIRED VIA CERiiiiir,D MAIL * * ALSO ADMrITED IN NORTH DAKOTA • STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN In Re: Proposed Levy of Special Assessments Against 235 Holly Road, Hopkins, MN 55343 TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS AND HOPKINS CITY CLERK. Notice is hereby given that the undersigned, as fee owners of the real property located at 235 Holly Road, Hopkins, MN 55343, objects to the proposed special assessment of their property for alleged street reconstruction and other improvements to Holly Road upon the following grounds: 1. The subject parcel has not derived any special benefit from the alleged improvements 2. The City has failed to obtain any before and after market value appraisal to sustain any assessment against the subject property. 3. The proposed criteria and method used to determine the assessments upon the subject property are not proper for the imposition of a special assessment, are not in accord with constitutional, statutory or municipal assessment policy requirements, and are, therefore, arbitrary and capricious, and thus, deprive the undersigned of property without due process of law, contrary to the requirements of the United States Constitution. 4. The proposed assessment is contrary to and violates Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. CITY OF HOP KINS FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NOTICE OF OBJECTION TO PROPOSED ASSESSMENT 5. The proposed assessment is arbitrary, capricious, 'confiscatory and unreasonable. 6. The proposed assessment does not result in any benefit, special or otherwise, to 1 the subject property. 7. The subject property is not specifically benefitted by the improvements. 8. The subject property has not and will not increase in market value as a result of the improvements. 9. The public hearing in said assessment was not properly noticed in conformity with Minnesota Statutes 429.061 and 429.081. Dated: pr, .1 2 8" ) my-- Stephen H. Fochler Katherine C. Fochler 235 Holly Road Hopkins, MN. 55343 • PROJECT NO. T7- 1 -- Address of Assessed Parcel 4 J ) 0 y What assessment does this concern S 4 R ^k. 4 -t J Property Identification Number: Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a . ( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. (y? *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c . Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM h(tt Wo (Print name) a65 4 ? e (addresg of property owner) * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. ( ) Yes (7(,) No (t/ ). 7.r - ' 7o 5' telephone Zip 3 f L ti (date) 3 n ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. g i '� Z ' Address of Assessed Parcel 13Z Ca ? �S ro Z' L (...(4 M G- What assessment does this concern t PQov.En'i c.E4T d' F PREST ` m L RN a Property Identification Number: 1 Q_ t 1 - 7 _ Z 1 q 1 o 0 3 0 Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? Yes ( ) No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. tom) Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: PEEL sT ?E i s TRH. fts\ 54r1sFAe► 0-ouDr - No hi 'c /-j -ssEss oic pt ( S A-RE_ roo * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. APIrrf+0 GLA 14 i< tei 1,eoz,Z,tt_ K (print name) (signature) (date) 1324 P2 s - ©mac La 4E- 1Z) 93g (address of property owner) t f1 i telephone Zip 5S 3c1-3 4 ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. /1 I Address of Assessed Parcel /1]O /rp// J-,*/ What assessment does this concern /Qt/ tp1fl'4�► 7 Property Identification Number: - _ Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? ( ) Yes () No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. ()Cl) Cancellation of assessment d_ ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: * Yo , will need to / fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and pro ide the city verification of your income or disability. ZW- Ariefr-A57 (print name) 1 fie5417 (si 4)&0, (address of property owner) X27 fg tureh (date) ( old- -g2 telephone Zip 6v */5 r Address of Assessed Parcel /go 7 What assessment does this concern Property Identification Number: - - # 0 0 __Z_ Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? (x) Yes ( ) No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. q7 —�-� b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. () Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: n Y er-e-C41rrt 4'� Vvl.2 -w� 7r /o Pros La-4 1 z., (address of property owner) / 1J liter e J.� - ! --�-�` -- -- k -e-e_. 14&-- „0 - 4-ett co-d- * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability_ 4 L&n . // ve, (print name) / (p ) (signature ) telephone zip (dat ) ( 3, -c7r' ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. Cl l Address of Assessed Parcel What assessment does this concern Property. Identification Number: / 1 /1 29 C) Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? ( ) Yes (4) No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City.Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability t'Tzer 121 it,) yet (print name) : (addre s of property owner) 1 P P Y signatur -) 7 7 - 7J d date} ( f ) sy - y /Z telephone Zip 3 � ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. Address of Assessed Parcel / y l7 / S N AA. • What assessment does this concern 3T ,ftF ��G4STC� /o/1/ Property Identification Number: - - - -ate 0 � o Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? ( ) Yes Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assespsment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a . ( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: Alb / 1 6 / 0-<;54 7 L2 Tf 6 l 1 t 4 41497 R,,10E 440 Y e ,/- 11(4:: 7'// *itou will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. No S eJA 4 y (print name) (signature) . (date) ` (� 7 _�� . tip (� ���g����`��� addr ss of property owner) telephone Zip ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. Address of Assessed Parcel Property Identification Number: Reason for the request: \ + f * You will asses sment and or disability. e t (print name) ( 5\1 4 haffyi (address of property owner) IVIAASEAUtikt (signature) What assessment does this concern tkOo1T- l.,`r, -' ; _L _aL .L 0 a L-1 Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? ( -7 ) Yes ( ) No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that. the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. ( Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment t, 1 fill out a spe • iai form for deferral of provide the city verification of your income `6 (date) (___Q.L.) j ' -f P-')s telephone Zip 5. Looc (1 (iV +6 be ?-e-ct-Qe\- 9 ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO I17—) 2— Address of Assessed Parcel /4 f ekU What assessment does this concern Property Identification Number: d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: j (address of property owner) no you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? Yes ( ) No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): • a . ( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. Cancellation of assessment You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. F e evi /3" r a, }rl C /4h 1 7 (print name) ) (signature /i4/0 9 {date) (� '9a - telephone Zip ,��3 ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. 6 4 - 7-1)- Address of Assessed Parcel 1 t j Q RrD fJ L-A • What assessment does this concern Property Identification Number: Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? () Yes ( ) No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. (26 Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: n ,,,s Q ' e I. • d �. .,�- - will need to fill out a special fo fo deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. `fib ep 15 t (print name) s ignature) (date) (address of property owner) telephone p dt,3 Zip �� To: Honorable Mayor, Chuck Redepenning Fran Hesch, Council Member Karen Jensen, Council Member Diane Johnson, Council Member Eugene Maxwell, Council Member James Gessele, Engineering Supervisor Steve Staler, Director of Public Works Re: Assessment appeal, Interlachen Park street reconstruction My name is Karen Fish and 1 live at 1418 Preston Lane. I am appealing our proposed assessment of $4,511.13 for road improvements in Interlachen Park, because our property value will not increase after street reconstruction. In assessment policy 10.04 is says, "When the city reconstructs an existing local or major street, 70% of the total project cost will be recovered by assessing the benefiting property for ACTUAL BENEFIT received." You stated in your letter and questionnaire to us dated October 2, 1997, "As you may know the new street will look very similar to your existing street. " How different will our reconstructed street look from the adjacent streets of Ashley Road and the East end of Preston which will receive a 2" overlay at NO COST to its residents? I am quite certain that if someone did an appraisal on my property and a similarly valued property on the East end of Preston, after our reconstruction and their 2" overlay, they would still be equally valued. There are several other reasons for my appealing this assessment. I would like to address several points concerning the actual cost of the assessment. When we received the preliminary project schedule from you it included the estimated per lot assessment of $2,750. About 2 or 3 weeks ago we received a "statement of assessment" from the City of Hopkins saying our assessment amount would be $4,511. The assessment amount went up about $1,700. You can understand my concern about the accuracy of the numbers. Also, I would like to see the council seriously consider reducing the 70% it uses to figure assessments. It is one of the highest in the state. I would also like to see the council reviewing the inclusion of ASSOCIATED costs (legal, bonds, administrative and engineering) in figuring the assessment. In our case these associated costs were over $27,000 ($20,000 for engineering and $7,000 for legal, bonds and administrative). The residents should only be assessed on actual construction costs. Now, I would like to speak to you as a person (a wife and mother) with feelings, concerns and many financial responsibilities. My husband and I have made a couple of CHOICES which have affected our lifestyle, specifically our financial lifestyle. First of all, we have CHOSEN to send our children to a Parochial School, a decision we would make again in a minute. By the way, the church we attend which supports this school is also affected by this assessment to a tune of $20,000 which in turn, as you can imagine, will affect us as parishioners. Even though we pay taxes for the public schools in Hopkins, we have made a CHOICE to spend quite a bit of money on tuition for our children. We also made the CHOICE after our children were born for me to stay home and not work outside the home, a decision we also wouldn't trade for the world. Because of these CHOICES we drive older model cars and make other financial sacrifices. These were financial CHOICES we decided to make. We seemed to have no CHOICE in reconstructing this street. The city has decided to reconstruct Preston Lane and, therefore, assess us. We do not have an extra $4,500 and would be FORCED into borrowing the money on an 8% interest plan, for street reconstruction which we don't need or want. We have been trying to save for other home improvements which we TRULY need and will not be able to afford if we are assessed $4,500. Last summer every street in Interlachen Park EXCEPT Preston, Ashley and Holly was repaired and sealcoated. I drove around and looked specifically at the streets in Interlachen Park which were rated similarly to Preston Lane in the Pavement Condition report (from June of 1995) which I requested and received from Mr. Jim Gessele, Engineer Supervisor, City of Hopkins. After the work done last summer on these similarly rated streets, they look in very good condition. IF Preston would have received repair and sealcoating, it would be in similar condition. Streets DO deteriorate without proper maintenance and our street does not appear to have been properly maintained. I am very surprised Preston Lane was omitted from last summer's repair and sealcoating, considering this project was not even APPROVED until December. In closing I would like to repeat my reasons for appealing this assessment. 1) Road reconstruction is not going to increase my property value 2) The assessment has increased b0% from the original estimate. 3) The assessment included associates cost which I don't feel we should pay. 4) I felt I had no choice in this decision. 5) Similarly rated streets in Interlachen are not being reconstructed and have been properly maintained or are getting a 2" overlay at NO cost to residents. ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. ( 11 -- C, Address of Assessed Parcel 31 c l ?re_si.\ Lam. What assessment does this concern "Skc.a jS1LwA- Property Identification Number: 19- LL7 -2L 5'� Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? ( ) Yes ( Q No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. pe, Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: (print name) 23) -got- ) ii/ezee- 1707 Cy * You wi < need to fill out a specia form for deferral of ..6 xu. assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. 41) ( signature) ( da e) c 6_ 12 > �i3S -l�l y (address of property owner) telephone SZ 2 5 Zip ,575 1- 6 Address of Assessed Pardel Z J(/ /4 /b/ goad What assessment does this concern S/Ael-7 5, 50 j Property Identification Number: f 0 0 6> 7 Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? (") Yes ( Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. ( Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. e hr - i k''1 A VA 44 12. Any a * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. c/414A L-g‘ gis/4/3 5-X* (print name) (signature) (date) w £i,, £ (addres of property owner) ( ) �If3i, telephone Zip 5 - 3 73 .4 Z5 1,0 Address of Assessed Parcel / ZS "to ,; What assessment does this concern f /" g Property Identification Number: d Jsok, (print f1 (p ame) ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. 77 / 2 - Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? ( ) Yes () No Please complete this form ' if you intend .to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that' the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. ()) Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: v v 7 No friz>"7 1 fi /47 a ‘4 h J t^ ' 'lo 7Yeo * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. (address of property owner) tie telephone Zip 5 Fi e 5/51 C / f 2 (date) a q? !'t ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. !O.-A& Address of Assessed Parcel What assessment does this concern sra:AZEI____"412.4eLVEMUCIEL Property Identification Number: Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? ( ) Yes X) No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a . ( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability} b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age4 c. ( ) Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. (print name) /S P s1ro,%I N AV y (address of pro erty owner) 47 110 Pi<1.V5 1 �, / ) signature) v. (date) c6l d, ) 90V- ”it-LW telephone Zip s S;? ij'3isir ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. 92 Address of Assessed Parcel Z.5 p/ S� ®// E What assessment does this concern Property Identification Number: 7 - a L y I OQ Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? /6 / U`{% (address of property owner) /A9/ xv,W. ( ) Yes ( ) No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a . ( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. t<k Cancellation of assessment d. ( ) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: 6)/ * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. P Act , 6 7- ; 'S . (print name) gnature) (date) (c) 9g5 -3c69 telephone Zip -'s"-.3V..? ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. q-7-1_a_ Address of Assessed Parcel / / What assessment does this concern Property Identification Number: __l._ _L Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing? Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a . ( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. Cancellation of assessment 0. d. ()C,) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: 4 15 1 (print nam Rtz-e-r-d'x.> (address of property owner) A. 4 _ A ( ) Yes ( ) No 6 / * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. signature) (date) (t/ -) telephone zip, ` .9 a� ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. Address of Assessed Parcel X (2. sigcc4- co,v .,;") What assessment does this concern Property Identification Number: Do you wish to address the City Counci Cd ileAer`i 6y (fric c , Po t the hearing? Please complete this form if you inte •_.peal to the council to defer, revise or cance your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become, part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) c. (X) Cancellation of assessment d. (9) Revision of assessment Reason for the request: .z ho '/ 4 e- Mc& Cc 6ct Aida 66t, ch C,oM, j 0,v ® seb,./ A' 4€ S%d like dc �a�z �u►, ,46ivarY * Y�e3 will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. Bact- ketizei.ileca4 2.5 (print name) (signature) (date) (a ddress of ro ert owner ;a ( 6 62 . ) ?&F- ?0 111 roperty owner) telephone 4 /9k4". 1 ..S zi a Dear Mayor Redepenning and Council Members, May 6, 1998 At last night's Council meeting I was one of the homeowners that filed for an appeal. After the meeting and allowing time for some of the discussions to sink in alittle, I had a few additional thoughts that I wanted to write down and forward to you. Please take a few minutes to read this letter and consider these comments at the working session and in your decision on how to proceed with the reconstruction and assessments of that work. Initially I understood that we were in "need" of repairs to the sewer and water mains 'and that this work obviously requires the road to be rebuilt. Last night we heard that was not the primary reason. It was said that we need the streets rebuilt to resolve the concerns over drainage (the streets being too flat), and the road subsurface is not substantial enough. And since this work was "required" then the city would take the opportunity to do the sewer and water work. Well I feel that we as homeowners are not responsible for the "design" of the road. And we should not be responsible to correct any design issues /defects. Its been there for 40+ years, as was stated, and now there is concern that the roads are too flat. Also if the road subsurface isn't sufficient to handle resurfacing then why in some sections of the neighborhood it is and others (as in ours) it's not. These streets were all put in at the same time. Should there substructure be the same? It seems that our peticular two streets were left alone for the last few years in anticipation of this work. That neglect caused deterioration to the streets, as admitted to. Has that also caused deterioration to the subsurface since its become more exposed? Or because the surface has become too thin causing the subsurface to breakdown? There were also comments surrounding the assessment and that fact that its currently based on the cost of the work instead of the benefit of the new streets to the homeowners. And whether we as homeowners benefit from new streets or have an increase in our property values by a newly paved street in front of our homes. The condition of these streets today is poor, there are sections that the asphalt is breaking up and there are loose chunks. What would happen if one of the many people out for a walk with their children, pets, baby stroller, were to trip and fall (someone riding a bike) and injure themselves as a result of the loose section in the street. If they wanted to pursue legal action to recover their medical costs, would they go to the homeowner that this happened by and try and recover from them? Or would they contact the city to recover these costs'? And since they would come to the city, then in this situation the city is benefiting from clean, well maintained streets. Granted we as homeowners get the benefit of driving and walking on these streets as well, but we should expect that they are in good condition. As a prospective home buyer, you would look at the neighborhood and say, "Oh these streets are nice and new, I bet the homeowners really care about them ". You would think that the city is doing a good job of that and that reflects more on the city as a whole not a homeowner or neighborhood. Finally, it was also stated that in cases were road work involves 2" top coating or resurfacing that these conditions are NOT assessed to homeowners and are paid by the city! With that in mind why are we as homeowners paying the whole bill of the new street work? Shouldn't and couldn't a portion of the total cost be reduced by the amount the city would typically pay for the 2" resurfacing! This might greatly reduce the amount you would want to access us as homeowners. The city would be paying for the sewer and water work (which was going to be paid for by them already), homeowners would pay the cost difference between a total reconstruction and the cost normally paid by the city to resurface the streets. I feel that you are asking us as homeowners to bear too much of the cost of this project and that the cost has risen because of neglect of the streets in preparation for this work. Thank you for your time in reading my comments and please keep these and the other comments made at last night's meeting in mind when discussing and deciding on how to proceed with this work. And in determining who should be responsible for what portion of the work. Sincerely, / la;/4/ Bill Tadewald 255 Holly Road Hopkins, MN 938 -9281 • Address of Assessed Parcel 2q/ What assessment does this concern Property Identification Number: Do you wish to address the. City Council at the hearing? ( ) Yes (]5 No Please complete this form if you intend. to appeal to the council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the City Council consider (check one): a .( ) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of permanent disability) b. ( ) *Senior Citizen deferment (over' 65 years of age) c. ( ) Cancellation of assessment d. Revision ( } of assessment Reason for the request: ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM PROJECT NO. C&..5 e ,/,/, /2_1 . * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of assessment and provide the city verification of your income or disability. ?4i ( 1.. (print nape) 71 0 c (address om property owner) signature) - (date) telephone Z (boi t9 City of Hopkins Memorandum Date: May 8, 1998 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Gessele, Engineering Supt. Subject: Interlachen Park Special Assessments Issues have arisen out of the May 5 assessment hearing concerning reconstruction projects on Preston Lane and Holly Road. Staff, with supporting documents from the City Attorney, will present discussion items in a question - answer format. Some issues will require further research and staff will return with more comment on Monday and Tuesday, May 11 -12. 1. Will the contractor offer an extension on his bid bond and thus assure the City a contract'at the bid prices? Yes. The consultant engineer has had a verbal confirmation of this. A signed agreement is in the making. The contractor has however indicated that should Council fail to award the contract at all or award at such a late date no project could be started in 1998, then he will seek compensation. 2. Why weren't the project streets in Interlachen Park maintained in 1997? Actually, the City stopped maintenance in 1996 when the decision was made not to sealcoat the project streets. Staff reviewed the 1995 pavement management street condition survey in 1996 and based on that report, decided to withhold seal coat procedures on certain Interlachen Park streets. Staff proceeded with the hope of undertaking Interlachen street improvements in 1997 but first needed to address the issue of revisions in Roadway Policy #8 -B. That issue was resolved in 1997, and staff began gearing up for preliminary project work in 1997 with construction in 1998. All the while staff held maintenance on Preston, Ashley and Holly to a bare minimum in 1997. Seal coating of the project streets would not have enhanced their structural integrity. 3. The City has not demonstrated through property appraisals the benefit enjoyed from the project. Normally the City does not use the appraisal approach until such time an appeal is filed in district court. That has occurred once in the past ten years. The City Attorney will provide a separate memo concerning the issue of benefit and what role that plays within M.S. 429. He will attempt to answer whether the City is adequately justifying its assessments without using benefit as a factor. I' May 8, 1998 Page 2 4. What is the City's obligation or liability should it delay construction to another year? The City is not obligated to complete this project in 1998. However, it may be prudent to press on with a project in the current year in light of expectations raised and the fact that construction costs may go even higher in 1999. By delaying a year or more, the City's liability is no more acute than with other streets it maintains to keep them in a safe, passable, and drivable condition. In other words, the City meets the test of providing safe conditions by continuing to patch potholes, other safety issues not withstanding. 5. Does the City have a long -range plan for street upgrades and maintenance in the Interlachen Park neighborhood? No, not in the sense of treating all the streets in that neighborhood as a cohesive project over a two or three year period, let alone over a year's time. The use of the pavement management program discourages neighborhood projects such as was customary in the past. That does not preclude staff from ignoring program recommendations and taking on more global projects. To be continued Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counc From: Steven J. Stadler, Public Works Director Copy: Steven C. Mielke, City Manager Date: May 12, 1998 Subject: Interlachen Park Street Improvements Assessment Policy Background Public Works Department The purpose of this memo is to provide information to assist City Council in its discussion and consideration of the proposed 1998 Interlachen Street and Utility Improvement project. City Council continued this project to work session based on public opposition. There were 19 appeals filed of the 35 total property owners proposed to be assessed. The current assessment policy, which assesses 70% of street reconstruction costs to benefiting properties, has been in place since 1991. It has been used on seven (7) previous street improvement projects. The attached spreadsheet shows a summary of special assessments from 1990 —1998. It is important to point out that the current policy has been very successful. The special situation regarding assessments for ` reconstruction of city streets was used on the 1 Street North improvement project. Also, the 1 Street North project included both partial and total reconstruction. The 1996 project in the Peaceful Valley/Westbrooke neighborhoods included overlays and reconstruction in the same neighborhood. City staff has always been aware that the ability to assess for an improvement is tied to the property benefit. Accordingly, on several projects assessments were modified to lessen the differences in the per lot assessments. This was done by adjusting the front footages in areas with odd - shaped Tots. The average per lot assessment has been about $3000 - there were very few assessment appeals on these projects. Interlachen Street/Utility Improvement Proiect Options 1. Cap the assessment amount to lower per lot assessments: It is not unreasonable to assume that given the number of assessment - appeals the current proposed assessment amount might be hard to defend in court, i.e., we are very near or exceeding the property benefit. Again, this assumption is solely based on the relative number of appeals on this project vs. previous projects. The current policy could be left intact but staff could add a paragraph which would cap the per foot assessment at 120% of the average on the previous three similar street reconstruction projects. In this case, the average previous per foot assessment would • be $37.16 /foot. Therefore, the maximum per foot assessment would be $44.60 This would allow improvement costs to increase but would prevent "spikes" in construction costs or costs of radically different design requirements from being transferred to property owners. City Council would also have the authority to remove special neighborhood requests from this 120% cap, i.e., if special curbing were requested or other non - standard features which would raise construction costs. This option would increase the city's cost of this project by $35,601.01 It would lower the assessed amount for an 80' lot from $4,406 — $4,472 to $3,568. 2. Assess the project at the preliminary assessment roll amounts. This would lower the assessment amount to $51.00 per foot as reported in the preliminary engineering report. This would be about a 9% reduction. The assessment for an 80' lot would be $4,080. 3. Reduce the scope of the project. Staff recommends that the scope remain as -is. There are no unneeded items incluced in this street reconstruction project. 4. City assume cost of additional portions of project. The city could pay for the cost of the pavement edge drain. This would lower the assessable costs by almost $23,000 and reduce the per foot rate by $6.87 — $7.09 However, the costs of underdrains have been included in previously assessed projects. 5. Cancel the project. There is no guarantee that this project will cost less in future years. The costs on this project compare favorably with bids on the current 6 Avenue storm sewer project. Substantial street patching and other maintenance would be required to keep the street safe. The project has been identified for two years. Canceling would jeopardize resident acceptance of other future projects. 6. Reduce the percentage of costs the residents pay under the current assessment policy. As mentioned above, the current policy has been successfully used on many past projects. A more reasonable step to lower assessments is to prevent unusually high rates by capping assessments based on recent project costs /assessments. 7. Cancel current project and overlay the streets slated for reconstruction. This action would be contrary to our pavement management philosophy as applied on the past two assessable street projects. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends option 1. This option retains the current policy but affords some protection to residents in the event that construction costs jump or if for any reason project costs vary considerably from previous projects. However, it does allow assessment rates to rise as construction costs increase. • L CU } c0 O O .�-- O O (Y) O (o 69 0 Ef3 69. 69 3 (O O 8 T N T 1 N N O ty N T E9. 69 a) O a ka to N o a) E a v 0 Y v c 3 3 oo oo 3 � o . n a o N v� (0 N f0 to O O N co p E J O lL LL u.. u_ LL a) LL LL LL • � C) 0 LO 25 O O N O O 0 t � L` u.. F_) CL M t� • c N CU CA N M -C o' LL LL E4 69 ER E9. ER M (�- ER ER 4 6 LL N 0 0 1 E 0) Il i (0 Lr) Lo ER. EA 0 0 a) 0 c to V) N 0 M M M O O O 1 1 M M CD CD (D h- 1` ti ti O N ti 0 0 0 0 O O M 0) 0) 0) T a) Y O co tij C O L V O) 3 Q O ( 3 N Q .0 0 C n .a -o •-� o E E ,� a) v = 0 Y U U To W O m > 0 0 CO 0 0)) 0) 4- co co 69 ER 69 te ER co Cii. O N Cr) Nr C.0 0) a) 0 • 0 ) T CD 0) 0) o ~ N o co , 0 O N N co r A-- 0) C3) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 ) 0) a) 2 V) L To 7:3 c o 'r -p 0) X M N a) A M T 1 CO 0) O C C t ( 0 0 0 0 0 03 0 00) T T Amended Final Assessment Roll Project 97 -12: Street Improvements 1 1301 Preston Lane 2 , 1311 Preston Lane 3 1319 Preston Lane 4 1325 Preston Lane 5 1401 Preston Lane 6 1409 Preston Lane 7 1417 Preston Lane 8 1425 Preston Lane 9 1501 Preston Lane 10 1509 Preston Lane 11 1517 Preston Lane 12 29 Ashley Road 13 1310 Preston Lane 14 1318 Preston Lane 15 1326 Preston Lane 16 1402 Preston Lane 17 1410 Preston Lane III 18 ' 1418 Preston Lane 19 1428 Preston Lane 20 6 Interlachen Road Project 97 -12 Final Assessment.xls 5/14/98 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -2141 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 19- 117 -21 41 0014 0015 0016 0017 0018 0019 0020 0021 0022 0023 0024 0033 0032 0031 0030 0029 0028 0027 0026 0025 FQ�O g0 90.00 85.00 85.00 80.00 80.20 80.70 80.70 80.70 80.70 80.11 100.34 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.20 80.60 80.70 90.50 271.74 90.00 85.00 85.00 80.00 80.20 80.70 80.70 80.70 80.70 80.11 100.34 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.20 80.60 80.70 90.50 271.74 1,847.19 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $4,014.00 $3,791.00 $3,791.00 $3,568.00 $3,576.92 $3,599.22 $3,599.22 $3,599.22 $3,599.22 $3,572.91 $4,475.16 $3,568.00 $3,568.00 $3,568.00 $3,568.00 $3,576.92 $3,594.76 $3,599.22 $4,036.30 $12,119.60 $82,384.67 1 200 Holly Road 2 212 Holly Road 3 220 Holly Road 4 234 Holly Road 5 248 Holly Road 6 254 Holly Road 7 262 Holly Road 8 201 Holly Road 9 209 Holly Road 10 217 Holly Road 11 225 Holly Road 12 235 Holly Road 13 241 Holly Road 14 255 Holly Road 15 265 Holly Road Project 97 -12 Final Assessment.xls 5/14/98 Amended Final Assessment Roll Project 97 -12: Street Improvements 19- 117 -21 44 0090 19- 117 -2144 0089 19- 117 -2144 0088 19- 117 -2144 0087 19- 117 -21 44 0086 19- 117 -2144 0085 30- 117 -21 11 0007 19 -117 -2144 0064 19- 117 -2144 0065 19 -117 -2144 0066 19- 117 -21 44 0067 19 -117 -2144 0068 19- 117 -21 44 0069 19- 117 -21 44 0070 30- 117 -21 11 0005 80.00 120.00 80.00 120.00 84.00 113.46 105.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 100.00 90.00 112.86 80.00 80.00 120.00 80.00 120.00 84.00 113.46 105.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 100.00 90.00 112.86 80.00 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $44.60 $3,568.00 $5,352.00 $3,568.00 $5,352.00 $3,746.40 $5,060.31 $4,683.00 $3,568.00 $3,568.00 $3,568.00 $3,568.00 $4,460.00 $4,014.00 $5,033.56 $3,568.00 1,405.32 $62,677.27 1 CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 98-25 ADOPTION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT 97 -12 INTERLACHEN PARK STREET IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the reconstruction of Preston Lane (Ashley Road to Interlachen Road), and Holly Road (from its terminus to Goodrich St.) as described in the files of the City Clerk as Project 97 -12, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF HOPKINS, MINNESOTA: . Such proposed assessment, as may be amended and a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2 . Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten years, the first of the installments to be payable on or after the first Monday in January, 1999, and shall bear interest at the rate of 8 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from May 19, 1998 until December 31, 1999. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest from one year on all unpaid installments. 3 . It is hereby declared to be the intention of the Council to reimburse itself in the future for the portion of the cost of this improvement paid for from municipal funds by levying additional assessments, on notice and hearing as provided for the assessments herein made, upon any properties abutting on the improvement but not made, upon any properties abutting the improvement but not herein assessed for the improvement, when changed conditions relating to such properties make such assessment feasible. 4 . To the extent that this improvement benefits non - abutting properties which may be served by the improvement when one or more later extensions or improvements are made, but which are not herein assessed, therefore, it is hereby declared to be the intention of the Council, as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 420.051, to reimburse the city by adding any portion of the cost so paid to the assessments levied for any of such later extension or improvements. 5 . The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of the assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins this 19th day of May, 1998. ATTEST: Terry Obermaier, City Clerk BY Charles D. Redepenning, Mayor