My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-26-92 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
02-26-92 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:18:58 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:54:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />FEBRUARY 26, 1992 <br />The City Planner replied that fair market value is <br />established by the County assessor. <br />Lambert asked if the City would accept a value <br />established by a certified public appraiser in lieu of <br />the assessor's value. Lambert felt that the County's <br />value is usually not consistent with market value. <br />The City Administrator reported that State Law requires <br />that the assessor's value be within 90~ of market <br />value. These values are based on average sales. The <br />Administrator reported that Little Canada's fair market <br />values have been at better than 95% of average sale <br />prices. <br />Lambert asked if a property improvement of 50o could be <br />done in year 1 and then in year 3 another 50% <br />improvement made. <br />The Planner did not know if stepping these improvements <br />was prohibited by the ordinance, but reported that the <br />first improvement would have to render the structure <br />habitable. <br />The City Administrator agreed that the first <br />improvement would have to bring the structure into <br />compliance with building code requirements. <br />Favis asked what she needed to do to reapply. <br />It was pointed out that the same process would need to <br />be followed as was done the first time. The City <br />Planner noted that during the review of the Favis <br />application, another issue was that plans submitted <br />were never complete enough nor adequate so that the <br />Building Inspector could determine that improvements <br />would bring the structure up to minimum building code <br />requirements. <br />Scalze suggested that if Favis planned to make another <br />application that she sit down with the Building <br />Inspector, City Planner, and City Administrator who <br />would explain the process in detail as well as <br />submittal requirements. Scalze suggested that Favis <br />ask the Building Inspector what needs to be done to the <br />property to make it habitable. <br />Favis estimated that it would take more than 50% of the <br />fair market value to make the structure habitable. <br />Scalze agreed that the property was in poor shape, and <br />pointed out that it was bought and sold through no <br />fault of the City. <br />Page 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.