Laserfiche WebLink
property owner paying approximately the first half of the cost and the City paying the rest of the <br />cost for the pipe that was sized larger than necessary to serve the assessed property. Mr. Lankston <br />acknowledged that the irrevocable permit that Mr. Meltebeke signed did include development of <br />curbs, streets and other improvements. The decision was made to da the storm sewer system <br />independent of the other developments because of Mr. Meltebeke's need to have the diagonal <br />channel removed from the property. <br />Mr. Meltebeke and Mr. alson, who is or has been an employee of Mr. Meltebeke, <br />questioned if the Meltebeke property was the only property specially benef ted by the installation. <br />They pointed out that there were large areas to the south that also drained into the system. They <br />also speculated that some areas to the northeast might also be connected to the system because <br />during construction they had noticed piping in the area that would have allowed such connection. <br />Mr. Lankston explained that the pipe junction with several passible connection points that <br />had been observed in the area had not been used. Mr. Lankston acknowledged that there were <br />other properties upstream of the Meltebeke property that also drained into the system, but he <br />explained that the City did not consider these properties to be benefited because they would have <br />been equally well served by continuing to use the drainage system as it flowed through the <br />Meltebeke property. <br />Mr. Meltebeke asked if it was common to include interest charges in the assessment. Mr. <br />Lankston indicated that it was a general practice to include the warrant interest in the assessment. <br />Mr. Lankston explained that in this project the interest costs had been a little higher than normal <br />because of 'the delays caused by high levels of groundwater. <br />Mr. Meltebeke concluded with an explanation that at the time the irrevocable consent had <br />been signed, and since that time, he had been distracted by personal concerns, and had not paid as <br />close attention as he would have wished. He acknowledged signing the consent, but was <br />concerned that he had not understood the consequences when he had signed. Mr. Meltebeke <br />indicated that he felt that the hearing was helpful in answering his questions and providing him a <br />better understanding of the process. <br />There being no further questions or testimony, the hearing concluded at 6:3~. <br />Minutes -December 17,1997 Public Hearing Page 2 <br />