80-044 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . 2 . consists' of bituminous surfacing and concrete' curb and gutter. MAYOR CREPEAU: Mr. Popovich, will you explain the financing. MR. POPOVICH: This improvement was petitioned for 100% by the property owner. Therefore, no feasibility hearings were required. The total cost of the improvement. is $47,408.00. In this improvement - as it turned out - there were five lots involved. However, the legal description at Ramsey County doesn't have described lots. We still have one parcel, so we're bound by the last recorded documents that are down there that are available through the Treasurer's office and through their computer, so it would appear we'd have to levy the $47,408 against this parcel of property and when the various deeds come through you will have apportionments. It subsequently turned out that on July 31 Mr. Sundburg requested that the $4',800 be spread over four lots and not five. He's apparently sold one of those lots - the other four haven't been sold. If you assess the total parcel it's $47,408.00. If you sprea~ it against the five lots, the sanitary sewer is $1,783, water $1900, and street and drainage $5797 for $9,481 per lot. If you just assess against four lots, the sanitary sewer would be $2200, water $2300 and the street and drainage $7200 for a total of $11,852, or'roughly $2400 more per four' lots as compared to spreading it over five. I'm a little perplexed on how to advise the Council to handle this because I look at things conservatively. If the other four lots haven't been sold and one has, and you just assess against four and the four go delinquent, you only have four lots to pick up your money from and that's $11,852 in assessments for those lots. Obviously if you do it over five, it's $9,481 per lot which is less and makes it easier to resell. Under the law you're supposed to assess the lots according to the benefits and I know in the pasti here and there you tried to follow the wishes of the property owner as the lots .were being sold. I think there were one or two instances where that may have been done in the past and you can do that here if you wish because apparently Mr. Sundburg has sold one lot and he doesn't want that person to get an assessment notice. I only point that out- you have the right to do that - but'technically five lots got benefited and five should be assessed, otherwise you have an unequal benefit. We're supposed to assess improve- ments on the benefit per lot, so you would have one with no benefit and four getting them all. If you ask me - from a legal point of view - you should assess according to the benefit. MRS. MC NIESH: I believe the lot that doesn't have the assessments is an existing house that before the subdivision did have sewer and water in it accessed on to Hamline Avenue.