My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-03-2000 WS
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
01-03-2000 WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:45:40 PM
Creation date
8/29/2018 3:05:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
1/3/2000
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
1/3/2000
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Depending upon the individual project, any one or a combination of these <br />methods may be utilized to arrive at an appropriate cost distribution. City staff <br />will consider all methods and weigh their applicability to the project and present a <br />recommendation to the City Council in the form of a mock assessment roll (or <br />rolls). A description of each assessment and its corresponding policy application <br />is presented. A separate section (Section III) will identify the appropriate <br />matchup of method with a specific type of project and analyze why each is <br />generally used. <br /> <br />The purpose of assessment formulas is to allocate assessed costs among benefitted <br />properties, the formula should result in a allocation of assessments which is <br />reasonably related to the benefit received. Any one predetermined formula will <br />not be appropriate in all cases because of circumstances unique to the relationship <br />between the specific project and the specific properties benefitted. When <br />considering an assessment method or formula for any given project, it may be <br />necessary to combine assessment methods or to modify the methods described <br />below. Therefore, the following description of methods of assessments should be <br />regarded as guidelines, which may not be appropriate in all cases. <br /> <br />b. Unit Assessment. A unit assessment shall be derived by dividing the total <br />project cost by the number of Residential Equivalent Density (RED) units in the <br />project area. A RED unit is defined as a single family residential unit. All platted <br />and unplatted property will assigned RED unit values equivalent to the underlying <br />zoning. When the existing land use is less than the highest and best permitted <br />use, the Council may consider the current use as well as the full potential of land <br />use in determining the appropriate number of RED units. Otherwise, the <br />following RED chart will apply on a per unit basis, subject to adjustment by the <br />Council for any inequities: <br /> <br />Single Family 1.00 RED <br />Duplex 1.00 RED <br />Condominium 0.80 RED <br />Multifamily (3 units or more) 0.80 RED <br />Townhouse 0.80 RED <br />Commercial 2.00 Units <br />Industrial 2.00 Units <br /> <br />The unit approach has proven to be the best method in those instances whereby <br />the improvement largely benefits everyone to the same degree and the cost of the <br />improvement is not generally affected by parcel size. <br /> <br />c. Area Assessment. The assessable area shall be expressed in terms of the <br />number of acres or the number of square feet subject to assessment. When <br />determining the assessable area, the following considerations will be given: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.