res_7621 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HONCHELL: Well, there is one home on this large parcel, and these are actually three combined lots, with one structure on it. So they own all of that. But there is only one house on it today. This simply seems to be one of the better ways to protect the future without making it unduly expensive for the people who are there at this time. It also provides a gravity system to serve the people who do want it today, without having an expensive impact on the rest of the people who do not. As someone pointed out, the risks are if nobody ever uses those other parcels, then the City wouldn't get its full complement of funds. STEVE: Another question, it said on the original petition, three of the five that were petitioned... HONCHELL: That's right there are five people who do not have sanitary sewer available to them today that have a home. Three of those five have signed the petition for the project. STEVE: We have a petition here in our portfolio of 5 addi- tional people who have petitioned in opposition to this project. HONCHELL: Those are primarily the ones in blue, not exclusi- vely but mostly. These are people, for instance take 94l (I don't know if they signed or not) or 955, they weren't one of the five who signed. These are already hooked to sanitary sewer out at Roselawn, but they would also have this potential assessment some- time if they ever split their land. They may be saying they don't want to pay any assessments now. I can understand how they wouldn't want to pay now. My understanding that there is also a meeting of the various property owners including most everyone that signed the petition and the feelings seemed to soften. I'm not saying they're fans of the project or enthusiactic suppporters, but they are not adamantly against it. Obviously if they're here, it's something that will come out in the meeting tonight. STEVE: Would you say again what you are going to do about the swamp land that requires ...(inaudible) between the blue and green patch, once the treatment has ended? HONCHELL: They would be assessed immediately for 97.9 feet, because that's the frontage they have along the roadway today. So they would be assessed for 97.9 feet. The staff recommendation is that there would be 93.5 feet that would be theoretically assessed, but not actually charged. They would not have to make payments on it until such time as they actually split their lot and need to use the sewer. If they don't split the lot, then they would not pay for the 93.5 feet. STEVE: If they do split the lot, they would have to have sewer anyway?