My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-12-1998 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1998
>
10-12-1998 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2024 3:43:42 PM
Creation date
6/5/2024 3:36:41 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
193
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
r <br />COl'.v <br />OCT 1 2 iJJb <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />CIT>'C- - <br />DATE: October 9. 1998 <br />ITEM NO. <br />Department Approval: <br />Name Gregory A. Gappa <br />Title Director of Public Services <br />Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: <br />Public Services <br />Item Description: Revised Assessment Roll Resolution for Shoreline/Heritage Sanitary Sewer <br />Rroiect - Resolution <br />Construction is nearly complete on this project with sodding and paving of the final lift of <br />bituminous pavement in 1999 left to be completed. Construction went very well for this project, <br />with no unexpected problems, so the project costs are substantially lower than estimated. The <br />original assessment roll, which was adopted at the June 29th assessment of $19,100 per unit. This <br />was based on 20 properties being assessed for the project. <br />There are two lots that were platted in the original subdivision that have been owned by an adjacent <br />landowner outside the subdivision ever since the lots were platted. These were purchased to provide <br />a buffer between the subdivision and the adjacent parcel. This subdivision was platted in the 1960's <br />before the current zoning regulations were in effect, so all of the lots in the subdivision are non- <br />conforming and are all approximately one acre in size. The original proposal was not to assess the <br />two vacant non-conformmg lots, so as to not imply any zoning or development rights for these lots. <br />Also the property owner has no intention of selling or development these lots, at this time, and would <br />have likely appealed the assessment. <br />The assessment of these two vacant lots was questioned by one of the citizens at the assessment <br />hearing. The Council indicated that based on the development of all of the other lots, the two vacant <br />lots would most likely be considered buildable in the future. Development of these lots with septic <br />would be difficult, but with sanitary’ sewer available, it would be feasible to develop these lots. The <br />Council directed staff to review' the ability of these parcels, and to include them in the project for the <br />calculation of the per-unit assessments if staff found that they would most likely be considered <br />buildable. Staff is recommending these lots be included in the calculation of the per-unit <br />assessments, fhis will lower the unit cost for all of the other properties in the project. The City will <br />carry the costs for these lots until they are developed at which time the costs will be covered through <br />a coimection fee. <br />Due to costs substantially low'cr than estimated, and based on the costs for project completion <br />distributed over 22 parcels, versus the original 20 parcels, the per unit project assessment will be <br />$15,500. The feasibility study assessment estimate was $19,100 per unit.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.