Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 23, 1990 <br />Scalze asked why the recommendation involves a <br />deferment of three years for some properties, and an <br />indefinite deferment for others. <br />The City Administrator explained that the indefinite <br />deferments are being recommended for the smaller lots <br />because it is felt that in order for these parcels to <br />redevelop, there would have to be a combination of <br />parcels. The three year deferment is recommended £or <br />both the Rudy and Frattalone properties because these <br />parcels are being used as residential properties. <br />However, these parcels are larger and could be <br />developed independently. The deferment on these <br />parcels is for a maximum of three years, or until the <br />properties are sold. Based on a previous <br />recommendation by the City Council discussed at the <br />improvement hearing. <br />Irene Frattalone asked for an explanation of the effect <br />on her parcel. <br />Fahey explained that in the case of the Frattalone <br />property, the proposal is to assess $5,317.60 <br />immediately. That is considered to be the residential <br />portion of the assessment. It is proposed to defer <br />$4,058.00 for three years or until the property is <br />sold, whichever is sooner. This amount is considered <br />to be the commercial portion of the assessment. Fahey <br />pointed out, however, that the interest would continue <br />to accrue on the deferred portion of the assessment. <br />Blesener suggested that all the recommended deferments <br />be for an indefinite period. <br />Fahey disagreed, and stated that he supported the <br />recommendation of the appraiser. Fahey pointed out <br />that the indefinite deferment meant that the commercial <br />portion of the assessment was deferred until the <br />property is sold or developed commercially. <br />Don Gagne asked if Nadeau Road were a part of the <br />project. <br />Fahey replied that it was not. <br />Gagne asked who would pay for the improvement of Nadeau <br />Road. <br />Fahey replied that the benefiting properties would bear <br />the cost of the improvement, that is the Kandice <br />Heights owners as well as the residential property to <br />the west which uses Nadeau Road for access. <br />Gagne questioned why the abutting homeowners on Country <br />Drive are being asked to pay for the improvement of <br />Page 11 <br />