My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packet Cc - regular meeting 7/25/1988
Orono
>
City Council
>
1988
>
Agenda Packet Cc - regular meeting 7/25/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2025 10:14:48 AM
Creation date
9/9/2025 1:29:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Administration
Admin Doc Type
Agenda Packet CC
Section
City Council
Subject
regular meeting
Document Date
7/25/1988
Retention Effective Date
9/9/2025
Retention
Permanent After File Date
Protection
Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
332
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
Zoning File #1025 <br />July 7, 1988 <br />Page 3 of 3 <br />5. Applicant's attorney suggested that the only other property in the <br />neighborhood and within the LR-1P district that is uniquely similar to <br />Henrich's is that secondary lot owned by Merle Halverson on Highwood <br />Road, just a few doors to the west of Henrich. Halverson owns a <br />separate tax parcel next to his homestead parcel that includes a cabin <br />structure that has a market value of $2,000 placed on it by the City <br />Assessor, and a land market value of $35,000 with about 0.25 acres in <br />area or about 30• larger than the Henrich lot. The Assessor, Rolf <br />Erickson, has told staff that if Henrich's lot had been considered as <br />a separate buildable lot, it would have been &signed a market value <br />for the land alone between $35,000 and $50,000. However, Henrich's <br />Lot 19 has (for 19P9) been assessed a taxable market of $20,000. <br />Clearly Henrich has not been paying the same amount of taxes on this <br />property that he would have, had it been assessed as a buildable lot. <br />Staff Roca =endation - <br />Presuming that the City Attorney's opinion will be forthcoming prior <br />to your receipt of this memo, please review that opinion. Staff would <br />request that Council review the Froposed findings in the conceptual <br />resolution for denial presented in your last packet. If Council finds on <br />the other hand, that approval is in order, then Council should direct staff <br />to draft a resolution of approval for your next meeting, and Council should <br />suggest specific supportive findings for such approval. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.