05-25-88 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES City Council May 25, 1988 Boosalis CUP (Cont.) Scalze pointed out that some of the pr~oper•ty owner~s on County Road C ar~e not willing to divide their~ par~cels as shown on Plan A. Boosalis r~epor•ted that he has purchase agr•eements with two of the pr~oper•ty owner•s and another• agr•eement that is in the pr•ocess of being signed. Mr~. Hauck, County Road C r~esident, r•eported that if a r~oad wer•e developed behind his pr•oper~ty, the assessments would be too high to leave any value in the lot that he would be able to divide. Boosalis pointed out that no one would be for~ced to divide their• pr•oper~ty, but would be able to do so whenever• they choose. Fahey noted that while the pr•oper•ties would be assessed for~ the r•oad impr•ovement, ther~e ar~e such things as senior~ citizen deferr~ments of assessments for those people who qualify. Fahey stated that Plan A appear•ed to be the best development plan for• this pr•oper•ty that he has seen and felt the plan had the least impact on the Iona Lane r•esidents. Fahey also noted that the use of Tax Incr•ement Financing may r•esult in lower• assessments for the pr~oper•ty owners. Boosalis agr•eed that the TIF assistance would go to suppor~t the r•esidential development and not the commer•cial. Blesener~ agr•eed that the pr~oposal of Plan A was the best he has seen for~ thi s proper•ty. Scalze agr~eed that the neighbor~hood could be a nice one and asked the Engineer• for~ an estimate on the amount of assessments for• the r~oad impr~ovements. The City Engineer• r~eported that other• impr•ovements in the City have r•unning about $8,000 to $9,000 for• a 75-foot single-family lot. However~, since ther~e is a por~tion of the r~oad that can only be assessed on one side the assessment might be $12,000 to $13,000 per• single-family lot. Boosalis r•epor•ted that similar• lots are being sold for• $20,000 to $25,000. Fahey noted that those pr~operties that ar•e commer~cially-zoned along County Road C, when divided, the back half of the pr•oper•ty would be rezoned to R-l. Fahey asked why Boosalis has not submitted plans with a 50 to 60 foot buffer to the nor~th. Boosalis r~eplied that he did not do this because be believes ther~e would be a shor•t-fall due to the r~eduction in the size of the building that would make the pr•oject financially unfeasible. Nowever•, the City Planner~'s office is cur•r~ently putting together• the TTF calculations. Boosalis also felt that by incr•easing the buffer• zone 5 to 10 feet would have no effect on the impact to the Townsley pr•oper~ty. Page -6-