My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-26-1998 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
1998
>
05-26-1998 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2012 4:16:02 PM
Creation date
9/26/2012 4:16:02 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR MAY 26, 1998 <br />( #22) County Road 6 Right -Of -Way Acquisition and Robert and Julie Hanning Subdivision <br />Plan at 4220 Sixth Avenue North continued <br />Jabbour suggested Hanning work with staff and come back to the next Council meeting on June <br />8 with a better plan. Gaffron should find out from the County exactly what will be taken for <br />right -of -way. <br />Hanning asked if a park fee would have to be paid if he subdivided now. Jabbour responded that <br />the maximum would be $4,900 for the additional unit. Gaffron explained that if the value of the <br />second parcel is $61,000 or more, the maximum amount is $4,900 for the park fee. <br />( #23) REQUESTS BY THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER RELATED TO THE <br />ACQUISITION OF THE TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY AT 1960 SHORELINE DRIVE <br />• <br />Moorse explained that Mr. Crear, owner of the property at 1980 Spates Avenue, would like to <br />purchase the tax forfeit parcel at 1960 Shoreline Drive. Council waived the sewer assessment <br />by resolution when the parcel was released for sale to adjacent property owners, based on the fact <br />that the lot would not be buildable. An additional special assessment of approximately $5,000 <br />was discovered that is related to legal fees incurred in the review of a planning application from • <br />a prior owner. The City was successful in fighting the application but was unable to collect the <br />cost from the prior owner. Mr. Crear is asking to have this assessment forgiven. <br />Crear added that he could not combine the tax forfeit parcel with his homestead property because <br />the mortgage company wouldn't allow it. Moorse suggested a covenant be drawn up to address <br />the issue. <br />Kelley asked what Crear planned to do with the tax forfeit parcel. Crear responded that he <br />planned to plant trees. He added that the University of Minnesota was interested in using the <br />property as a test site for bio- remediation and how chemicals react with the soil. <br />Kelley asked how Crear intended to block the road noise as the building currently provides a <br />buffer. Crear responded that the existing fence would not be removed until something was built <br />to take its place. Kelley asked for a sketch plan from Crear and stakes showing the property <br />lines. Crear noted that Hennepin County was going to take a portion of the property. <br />26 <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.