06/26/2006Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Tune 20, 2006. In rtg&dgiitdtViPpotUdA§sessmefifPINAVV5142440CdV James E. Studenski City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 Mr James E. Studenski, ) l 5 6u 4 e Kevin M. and Karen C. Leavell / /Z6 f 06, 511 Lois Lane IQ`/ Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 RECEIVED JUN 2 1 2006 CITY OF LINO LAKES As the property owners of 511 Lois Lane (Lot 1, Block 1 of Mardon Acres), we would like to have written into the city records our objection to the Lois Lane Utility Extension. As you know we voiced our objection at the meeting on 3/21/06. This was the first chance to object to the utility extension, as we never received notice of a prior neighborhood meeting. It is our belief that the original petition for the extension of services on Lois Lane was to precipitate and make possible the subdivision of the properties of the other seven lot owners. Of the eight affected properties, our property (511 Lois Lane) is the only one that is not able to subdivide. There is no access or services to the rear of our property and not enough build -able space on either side of our house. Each of the eight properties on Lois Lane has been set up to receive services for 2 homes for a total of 16 connections. It is the intention of the city to assess the eight properties for a single connection now, and allow the remaining eight connections to be carried on the city books until the lots subdivide. The 16th connection will never occur as we have stated above. (The property at 511 Lois Lane is not set up for subdivision) In the past a` home owner was not required to connect to services until it became necessary. At that point when you made connection of services you were assessed. We believe that this method is fair and equitable for all home owners. At this point in time it is not necessary for us to connect to the city services. The assessment on our property for $22,619.10 for services that we did not petition for and are not connected to is inappropriate and in contrast to the way the City of Lino Lakes interacted with its citizens in the past. We ask that our property (511 Lois Lane) be removed from the list of homes that are to be assessed until the time when we ask for connection of services. Respectfully, el, an. Kevin M. and Karen C. Leavell