res_7317 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

be even more expensive and there are no right-of-ways and we would have to go through people's front lawns back here to the south. The structure, as best we can determine from our conversations, is basically a warehousing operation. However, according to our information, they do have individuals that are in the structure several hours on many days and as such require sanitary sewer facilities. With that in mind, we made the feasibility study to provide those sanitary facilities to the City sewer. Again in this case there are some sanitary sewer assessments involved that were not fully paid in the past. MR. POPOVICH: The total published cost of this project was $l7,354.00 and it's recommended that the entire amount be assessed against the property owner, together with whatever trunk sewer assessments that have not been levied in the past. Obviously, the assessment hearing would be at a later date and we would not recommend that they be spread longer than l5 years in today's market. MAYOR DEMOS: Are there any written communications? MR. ANDRE: There are none. MAYOR DEMOS: I will open this hearing to the public. Is there anyone that wishes to be heard? THOMAS HOLMES, Property Tax Representative with Farmer's Union Grain Terminal Association: Farmer's Union Grain Terminal Association owns the building located at l750 County Road C and leases the site from the Burlington Northern Railroad. This matter was dropped on my desk rather suddenly and I really didn't have a great deal of time to prepare for this. I have made some notes and some points I would like to refer to in covering this matter. Just a little historical background on the property - the subject property is, as I mentioned, a leased site, owned by the Burlington Northern Railrpad, and Grain Terminal Association owns the building located on that site. The building is essen- tially a warehouse with a small carpenter shop inside. The building does have a couple of plumbing fixtures to accommodate the needs of the carpenter on duty. Presently, the property has its own independent well and septic system. It's GTA's position - they're not questioning the methods, necessarily, of the assess-. ment - the method used to determine the cost. Our question relates to the fact that - we're pretty much questioning the supposed result and need of that benefit that this assessment will provide. It's our opinlon that the assessment itself is unnecessary. The nature and use of the property is such that the impro~ement would serve no useful purpose to us. I guess we're pretty much interested in knowing what our options are, as far as the building itself is concerned. As I mentioned, the building basically is a warehouse facility - a cold storage facility - with a small carpenter's shop located in it. I also mentioned to you that the few plumbing fixtures that we do have are used to accommodate the carpenter. We can certainly move 2