res_6549 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

There could be a use at a later date. This hearing, then is to cetermine whether or not to put the improvement in. Whether or not you feel you benefit or should be assessed would be a matter for the assessment hearing which would probably be next August. MR. MARGOLIS: I don't think we'd object to a reasonable assessment, but from the facts this gentleman stated, we would be assessed on the higher rate. Yet, we derive no benefit primarily because we're a corner property and (inaUdible) MAYOR DEHDSs I think it's just t.he front footage on Lexington. COUNCILMAN GRAUELs Do you own the property on the other side of the bank? MR. MARGOLIS: That belongs to Paster, and they're the ones that would derive the benefit, and they should be assessed accordingly, and also when they cross the street there, Paster's already (inaudible) Lexin9ton Plaza has the water, I believe, served by St. Paul. The people that are going to benefit are the housing for the elderly people and I think this is primarily to serve those people more than it would for our property. COUNCILMAN GRAUEL: I think that should be taken into consideration at the time when the assessment hearings are held because I think you do have a point. If you already have water - you're securing water from St. Paul, and for your sprinkler system you're tied into the Roseville system. You bring up the question about building additional buildings on the property. I think if you look back in the records, probably what is al- ready there probably over-extends the parking requirement in that building. MAYOR DEMOS: I was referring to re-development. MR. MARGOLIS: If there t s going to be an assessment, we would like it to be on a fair basis. COUNCILMAN CURLEY: I think due consideration should be given them at the assessment hearing because I don't think this benefits them as much as it does the other people.