10-12-1983 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS INC. MEMORANDUM TO: David Licht FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: September 20, 1983 RE: Little Canada - Lee LeMay Alternative Subdivision Plans FILE NO: 758.09 - 83.23 My analysis is based on the following points: Goals: 1. Establish a through street between Arcade and Greenbrier. 2. Minimize costs of capital improvements. 3. Distribute those costs fairly (equally) as possible among parcels. 4. Avoid creation of parcels which must front on streets other than local (i.e., create interior lots). 5. Accommodate schedules of developers (if possible). 1. All three alternatives address this issue. 2. Plans B (1,850' of centerline construction) and C (1,900' of centerline construction) create the least need for improvements. Plan A shows about 2,350 of centerline construction, however, it would be assessed back to a greater number of fronting parcels. The mean centerline construction per parcel is as follows: a. 2,350' 38 affected parcels = 61.8 feet of assessment per parcel. b. 1,850' : 29 parcels = 63.8 feet per parcel. c. 1,900' t 32 parcels = 59.4 feet per parcel. 3. I divided the plan area into likely stages of development, after hearing from LeMay and Dennis Peck, a buyer of the Rose Picha property, and listening to discussion of the City Council as to delayed development in Sections I and III. I then calculated the mean amount of centerline construction within each development stage. Plan A showed the lowest mean deviation at 18 %; Plan B was next at 22 %; Plan C deviated the greatest. Each lot varied an average of 30% above or below the mean centerline construction footage. The lower the deviation, the more equally assessments are distributed among parcels. Plan A, therefore, is the "fairest" of plans to all benefitters. 4 4820 minnetonka boulevard, suite420 minneapolis, mn 55416 612/925 -9420