My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-24 & 25-1995 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
10-24 & 25-1995 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2014 12:46:30 PM
Creation date
1/10/2014 8:11:24 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
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
3. Prior to the commencement of testimony, the City of <br />Little Canada stipulated that the property at 551 Allen Avenue <br />was eligible for subdivision. Based in part on that Stipulation, <br />the Appellants acknowledged a benefit to their property as a <br />result of the water main improvement in the amount of $2,280.86. <br />4. Prior to the improvements, Allen Avenue was in a <br />deteriorated condition and in need of replacement. Due to soil <br />conditions and the extent of deterioration of the roadway, <br />replacement of the street was necessary and routine maintenance <br />or patching of the street was not feasible. <br />5. The installation of curbs and gutters was appropriate <br />and necessary since street drainage on Allen Avenue is inadequate <br />and curbs and gutters were needed to protect the road from future <br />damage. <br />6. The installation of water main beneath Alien Avenue as a <br />part of Little Canada Improvement Project 92 -11 was both <br />reasonable and prudent and avoided the possibility of tearing out <br />Allen Avenue or Vanderbie Street in the future to install water <br />main improvements. <br />7. The Appellants received a special benefit to their <br />property from the street, curb, gutter, and water main <br />improvements. <br />8. Since a width of 75 feet for a residential lot is <br />required by the Little Canada Zoning Code, the Respondent's <br />appraiser properly considered Appellants' property as two <br />separate lots: an improved lot with a width of 110 feet and a <br />2 <br />Page 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.