My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-24-95 Council Special Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
10-24-95 Council Special Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 4:38:14 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:57:13 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.
/
35
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 />OCTOBER 24, 1995 <br />hearing it was noted that her property has 67 feet of <br />frontage and would be assessed accordingly. She is now <br />being assessed for 85 feet of frontage. <br />The City Administrator replied a preliminary assessment <br />roll was put together 2 or 3 years ago using the <br />frontaqe shown on the County section maps. In drafting <br />the assessment policy, there was discussion about odd- <br />shaped lots and the equity situation where a lot does <br />not have a lot of frontage on the street, but has a lot <br />of square footage. Based on that discussion, an odd- <br />shaped lot formula was decided on to equalize the <br />amount of assessment to such lots with the more typical <br />lot. <br />Mrs. Martin pointed out that her lot has less square <br />footage than the lot next door. The neighboring lot is <br />being assessed for 80 feet of frontage, while her lot <br />is being assessed for 85 feet. Mrs. Martin reported <br />that her lot is one of the smallest in the area. <br />The City Administrator explained the odd-shaped lot <br />formula. The Administrator also noted that under the <br />old assessment policy, the Martin lot would have been <br />assessed for 75 feet and not the 67 feet suggested by <br />Mrs. Martin. <br />Mrs. Martin did not believe the value of her property <br />would increase by $3,700. <br />Morelan pointed out that the Feickert property is being <br />assessed on two sides. The Martin property is a corner <br />lot, but will never by assessed on the County Road C <br />side, since that is a County road. <br />Fahey again pointed out that the assessment policy has <br />been reviewed in its entirety by a district court judge <br />and upheld. The judge specifically found on all issues <br />that the assessment policy was reasonable. <br />Mrs. Martin pointed out that the City of Maplewood did <br />not widen Keller Parkway to the width that Little <br />Canada did. The City of Maplewood listened to its <br />residents. <br />Fahey replied that it depends on which people are <br />listened to. Does the Council listen to the many <br />people who use the lake and want a safe place to walk <br />and bike with their children? Or does the Council <br />listen to the adjacent property owners, and end up with <br />a very narrow paved shoulder on either side of the <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.