01-15-1980 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

`� RL��,ULAR P4EFTIN� OF TIiF OROP10 COUr1CIL, JAIIUARY 15 , 1980 Page 9 , l Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record STUBBS BAY STUDY ARFA the Stuhbs Bay Study Area Status Report dated January 8, 1980 , which states: After the last Council meeting, staff has done some detailed research on P4r. P4cClearv' s property and on several different sewac�e handling options for the Studv Area. �9e have had several meetings with r'ir. P7cCleary to discuss housinc� options on his property including one rleetinc� held January 2 , 1980 with P4r. P4cCleary, P'Iayor Van Nest and m��self. The substance of that last meeting was as follows : A) The nine East Lake Street properties have a riarket value of about $225 ,000 which makes purchase and/or condemnation c�uite exPensive and less viable. Three units have no sanitarv f_acilities and should be declared hazardous thereby requiring either condemnation or rehabilitation at a cost of about $6 , 00� per unit, equal to the market land value. Proper sewage disposal on any of these proPerties should be by holding tank costing about �1, 000 per unit for installation and between �1,000 and $5,000 per year purip cost. B) Installation of a collector system to serve only the East Lake lots and P4r, r4cClear��' s property would cost about $150 , 000 and result in an assessment of about 513,000 per unit. The initial costs of intercePtor connection and on-site disPosal are cori�arablP. C) Expansion of the collector systerl to serve the enti�� East Lake-Tonka-Crestview Area of about 50 units ��aould cost about $300 ,000 and result in a per unit assessment of about �6 , 000. (All of these dollar estimates are ball park figures and are not hard by any means. ) D) Even if tax increment financinc� could be used to finance such a sewage system, it would take about 1J-15 units on Mr. PScClear��' s property to �ortize the bonds. Thisjis a density equivalent to four units Per acre. E) PZike Gaffron' s report indicates that it is marginally feasible to construct a mound-type on-site system on Mr. McCleary' s property for use by one or two units. Separation of toilet wastes (into a holding tank) and grey water (into the mound) has less environmental risk and would allow three units on site. Four or riore units would probably rectuire holding tanks or off_-site disposal. (Continued)