View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 23, 2001
CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS@ 5:30 P.M.
AGENDA
• CALL TO ORDER:
• PRAYER:
• PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
• ROLL CALL:
• HONORS AND AWARDS:
• PRESENTATIONS:
• CONSENT AGENDA:
a. Approval of Minutes. CITY CLERK
b. Community Relation Committee 2001 Appointments. COMMUNITY
RELATIONS COMMITTEE
c. Request to Dissolve a Planned Unit Development for 1050 West
Western Avenue (Waterfront Centre). PLANNING & ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
d. Alley Vacation in Jeannof Court, Block 2. PLANNING & ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
e. 2001 Wafer Treatment Chemical Bids. WATER FILTRATION
f. DNR Agreement for Engineering Study, LEISURE SERVICES
g. Port City Princess. LEISURE SERVICES
h. Fertilizer Bids. LEISURE SERVICES
i. Resolution for Charitable Gaming License (Muskegon Yacht Club).
CITY CLERK
• PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. Special Assessment District Barclay Street. ENGINEERING
b. Special Assessment District Sherman Blvd. ENGINEERING
• COMMUNICATIONS:
• CITY MANAGER'S REPORT:
• UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
a. Request for Resolution for Gaming License (Muskegon Connection
Golf Club). CITY CLERK
• NEW BUSINESS:
a. Charter Parks. LEISURE SERVICE
b. Parking Lease - West Michigan Dock & Market Corp. CITY
MANAGER
c. Arena Contract. LEISURE SERVICES
d. Arena Maintenance. LEISURE SERVICES
e. Community Center RFP. LEISURE SERVICES
f. 2001 Police Cruiser Purchase. PUBLIC WORKS
g. Plow Truck Chassis. PUBLIC WORKS
h. Fair Housing Impediment Study. COMMUNITY AND
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES
i. Housing Commission Appointments. CITY MANAGER
• ANY OTHER BUSINESS:
• PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
• CLOSED SESSION:
• Reminder: Individuals who would like to address the City Commission shall do the following:
• Be recognized by the Chair.
• Step forward to the microphone.
• State name and address.
• limit of 3 minutes to address the Commission.
• {Speaker representing a group may be allowed 10 minutes if previously registered with City Clerk.)
• ADJOURNMENT:
ADA POLICY: THE CITY OF MUSKEGON WILL PROVIDE NECESSARY AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES TO INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT TO
ATTEND THE MEETING UPON TWENTY FOUR HOUR NOTICE TO THE CITY OF MUSKEGON. PLEASE CONTACT GAIL A. KUNDINGER,
CITY CLERK, 933 TERRACE STREET, MUSM] 49440 OR BY CALLING (231) 724-6705 OR TDD: (231) 724-4172.
Commission Meeting Date: January 23, 2001
Date: January 3, 2001
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Planning & Economic Developmen( 0
RE: Request to Dissolve a Planned Unit Development for 1050 W.
Western Ave. (Waterfront Centre)
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
Request to dissolve the Planned Unit Development (PUD) previously granted for a
mixed-use development at 1050 W . Western Ave. (Waterfront Centre).
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED:
None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request. The vote was
unanimous.
1/3/2001
Staff Report [EXCERPT]
CITY OF MUSKEGON
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
December 13, 2000
Hearing; Case 2000~49: Staff-initiated request to dissolve the Planned Unit
Development previously granted to the Waterfront Centre for a mixed-use development
at 1050 W. Western Ave.
BACKGROUND
The Waterfront Centre property is currently in foreclosure. As plans for redevelopment of
this property are then, of necessity, on hold, staff is asking to dissolve the Planned Unit
Development which was previously granted for the property. This would give the property a
'clean slate' for any potential new developers who may come forward in the future, and not
hold them to the previously approved site plan for the property.
Staff has received one phone call on this request, from Steve Gawron, President of Nims
Neighborhood Association. Ml'. Gawron had some questions about the reason for dissolving
thePUD.
City of Muskegon Planning Commission - 12/13/00
CITY OF MUSKEGON
RESOLUTION 2001- 7{c)
RESOLUTION TO DISSOLVE THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PREVIOUSLY
GRANTED FOR 1050 W. WESTERN AVE. (WATEFFRONT CENTRE)
WHEREAS, a planned unit development and associated site plan had previously been approved
for the Waterfront Centre at 1050 W. Western Ave.; and,
WHEREAS, the project was not able to proceed and the property is currently under foreclosure;
and, .
WHEREAS, proper notice was given by mail and publication and public hearings were held by
the City Planning Commission and by the City Commission to consider said petition, during
· which all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard in accordance with provisions
of the Zoning Ordinance and State Law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and staff have recommended to dissolve the planned unit
development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the recommendation by staff and the City
Planning Commission be accepted and the planned unit development for 1050 W. Western Ave.
is hereby dissolved
Adopted January 23, 2001 .
Ayes: Sieradzki, Spataro, Aslakson, Benedict, Nielsen, Schweifler,
Shepherd
Nays: None
Absent: NOne
CERTIFICATE
The undersigned, being the duly qualified clerk of the City of Muskegon, Muskegon
County, Michigan, does hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of a
resolution adopted by the City Commission ofthe City of Muskegon, at a regular meeting of the
City Commission on the 23rd day of January, 2001, at which meeting a quorum was present and
remained throughout, and that the original of said ordinance is on file in the records of the City
of Muskegon. I further certify that the meeting was conducted and public notice was given
pursuant to and in full compliance with Act No. 267, Public Acts of Michigan of 1976, as
amended, and that minutes were kept and will be or have been made available as required
thereby. j -- ,/ .
DATED: January 23 2001. ~ J.. ~~ QAJ
Gail Kundinger, CMC/ AAE(J'
Clerk, City of Muskegon
City of Muskegon
Planning Conmission
Case #2000-49 +
Muskegon Lake
LR
* = Subject Property(ies)
LR I
0 = Notioe Area
I
I
I
~ RM-1 = Low Density Multiple-Family Residential
I 1-2 B-2 = Convenienoe and Comparison Business
1-2 1-2 = General Industrial
( 1-2 LR = Lakefront Recreation
B-2 LR
LR
1-2 ~
I
f.l~ I It./
1-2
''-
1
' " 1-2
I I;;;,
:ii
i~/
!!,,___c
1-2
1' 0 /
I
\ ,------ -~~-a-~·,
~HIG~Nf\/
I§ ~
~
! I
RM-1 //RM-1/ I I !
1 I I I~
I
I , RjVl-11 1 I 1-2
rr-L-,- i I I 1 , i ,I I !
1111 .1
f
I~ I I I
1
il
I
I I
vyA~HJrG~ON V 1 I I L______J I
1 11
1 I I I I I II I ' I
~ / / r------------_ I ' , I I I
I
, I I ,
600 0 600 1200 Feet
Commission Meeting Date: January 23, 2001
Date: January 3, 2001
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Planning & Economic Development ~
RE: Alley Vacation in Jeannot Court, Block 2
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
Request for vacation of the existing east/west alley only in Jeannot Court, Block 2,
bounded by Laketon Ave., Nevada St., Windsor Ave. and Franklin St.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED:
None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends vacation of the proposed alley, as described above, with the
condition that all City easement rights be retained.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommended denial of the request for vacation of the
proposed alley. The vote was:
Yes (Denial): Abraham, Mazade, Nielsen, Smith, Sartorius, Coleman, Kleaveland
No: Aslakson
Absent: Veltkamp
1/3/2001
--- - -- -
--- ------
lS VOVl\3N
-i ==~ =-=
C ,_
o E
[-_-lTT[]JTJUl IJifIJJ
lS AV7:JlJV8
------~--------------------------
iE',: -== --=--=
-Io~8is--~ ---l r==1- - - -
0 C Cl)
~ C t/J
---
-
~
----
CITY OF MUSKEGON
RESOLUTlON 2001 - 7( d)
RESOLUTION TO VACATE A PUBLIC ALLEY
(DENIAL)
WHEREAS, a petition has been received to vacate the existing east/west alley only in Jeannot
Court, Block 2, botmded by Laketon Ave., Nevada St., Windsor Ave. and Franld QQmplet" ltvmt 4.Q
rfj!gl&
. . FOR 8VREAU USE ONLY
lde,ntifil;"tiw, in',
3-, Th\! «dd,1111• of the r•gl"Hcritd offli;:e iri.Miohigao (a P.O. 1;!:oi; may not be designat•d H the addN:H ~f thia ra9iste.recl office)
3 l'i \l C:Dt, 8',.! ,i,, ecr.;; s·r. MV S/(r" .. (,u ,..._,, {'I\ \ , <-/ ~~'-1'--l I
'
4. Otterib• ,he purpose and aet:tYities of the· coreoratlon during 1he year covered by this report
7"7:- ff"r)fn.°"t(.. -i-~v{ ·_;.•\{y~!~rn1.en.t ::-f (lt;i)l- ((-11';,•\,'\~l'L,.',,_1 ti,..J1~.f-i!-,-~r;-.f'f' f',\(~( ,-.-f.s:-\\ . . . U~b
·fi:,.c; 11 -kf s c~.,...-1.. t 1'.rc\1.\,\• l."'i:: ; ·.,;.:·\ :'.. 14-c.. 5 il't,,t( J"ll',,.°r J ·i~ L ( !i .
~-
Proaldont (R/i,qv111,;!}
ti.AM!
-~ BUSINESS OR RESIDENCE ADDRESS
~ t Ii::_ L\..' qr\ s "~,,;,~ '.JI.I ~ ':i A·r· ~, \'\L"t 't' I ~f, c, -c.,i-~·,,-...1. t'<.c, f1 , ~'( $, 111,, -f ,, S< ~'
So-c«ttlll)' {RequlreO}
fp--~"\ S. ,,.., ;-'+"•\ ,,l, \I ..{., l-t,, {A•, f• .. ;), . f,...,' l,c \ j (,r,\,,ft' (..::'1,,t,ud r 1 ,-n I I ,;,_JCj[i_\l.J
·rr,;in,u~r (R.aqu!rGd)
.'.J" n. A,-.:t , ·-i -< , .'J:.)C i. 1-Lc,,i, A-.,.~(_ f::,c .. f,, 1,, ~~ '--- t I , rn1 cj '1 4 (. I
vice l"fB!l!11 '-I .., -,-,. ·; ,. _
0)fiji,t.Qf
(','-.. cl S·f,/'C\ 1-, "\ll
'
.;i" ·;.::.. (<_+[ ../Y, ,'Y\ VIS l-e ,,., "' i)'\\, •·H LjLI I
6. The flllng fee is 510.00. Please mcike your_ c.heck or money order PGYablo to the Stato of Mi~h.igi:m. Thi:i n:port mutt be filed on or before
October 1, 2000. Return this signed' rllpon·wlth fee to: Mlchlgan Depanmemof Consumer & Industry Services
Corporaijon and Land Dev(llopment Bur~au
P.O. Box 30481
LansinQ, Ml 4.9909~7981
(017) ,4Hl400
S~~ of auihoridld officer o~en~
, 1 "-,LA, .-1 )(r, T,, _. ·
1
If;,1,·,;.-w
TIUa
):$ l'lt A(' ,
I C/ Poto
C .~ L1 . (liJ
j Phcme (Optjcnat)
-"31-7'$S -1 LJ 1t./
~~rriote :space Is needed adi;1Qlr,,aJ paget may l!ieJnclu'C1.ect Oo not atao!e 3fl).1 ttM'lS to te(lort.'i"riis report.is required by .Sect,l(lf1 91·1, Act 162. Pub/lo Acts of 1982, 11s:
1utiond110. f'sMure ta flle t,hhl r@pQrt moiy re~ult lo lhe a1sao11.1uontrevotatloli ol the ccrporeitlon.
01/18/2001 10:57 5157555915 MUSKEGON YACHT CLUB PAGE 02
1/16/01 9:41:34 p,2
Thi, is to Certify Th~t
THE MUSKEGON YACHT CLUB
wa, -.121idly worpor11t1d' on JUIJJ 3, 1936, 12s a Michigan nrmprofit corporation,
and taid corporatio~ is validly in .txl1tin.ce unde,- t.he taws o/ this Sta.te.
Tht• cBrHftcat, i• issued to, atteiit to the fact th4t the corporatio" i• in gaod standing
in IMS affi•• au ~I fMs ,date and Is duly authariud to transact busiMS/1 or conduct
affair• in Michigan and ..for 110 other purpose. It i• in th• usual form, mad• by me
at the proper officer, and ls entitled to have full faith and credit gi11•n It In e11ery
court and offioe within the United States,
In testimony whereof, I ha'Je hore,mto set my
hand and affixed the Seal of the D•part01enl,
in the City o/ Lan•ing, this 18th d- -
<19
1
~
0
--
r:r::
<
ID --
-
--
.... C>
?'
--
=
-- ' '
•t-' I'
1111
:' '~
'
''
-k'''
'
'' '' ''
'' '' -t-
'' ''
-
'
'' ''
'' ''
=
-~~~-~-~~--~-..::::::1::~==·
'~'
=~-=:-=- c&IJI,
1116/01 16 flarclayspc.doc
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING BY CITY CLERK
STATE OF MICHIGAN )
) ss
COUNTY OF MUSKEGON)
GAIL A. KUNDINGER, BEING FIRST DULY SWORN, DEPOSES AND SAYS
THAT SHE IS THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MUSKEGON; THAT AT A
HEARING HELD ON THE 23 RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2001 THE CITY
COMMISSION ADOPTED A RESOLUTION CREATING THE FOLLOWING
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT:
All parcels abutting Barclay Street 90' north of the north ROW line of Sherman
Avenue to the south ROW line of Hackley Avenue.
A NOTICE OF THE SAID HEARING WAS DULY PUBLISHED IN THE
MUSKEGON CHRONICLE, A DAILY NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION
IN THE CITY OF MUSKEGON, ON JANUARY 13, 2001.
DEPONENT FURTHER SAYS THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED
UPON EACH OWNER OF OR PARTY IN INTEREST IN PROPERTY TO BE
ASSESSED IN THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT WHOSE NAME APPEARS
UPON THE LAST TAX ASSESSMENT RECORDS OF THE CITY OF MUSKEGON
BY MAILING SUCH NOTICE IN A SEALED ENVELOPE BY FIRST CLASS
UNITED STATES MAIL, WITH POSTAGE PREPAID, ADDRESSED TO EACH
SUCH OWNER OR PARTY IN INTEREST AT THE ADDRESS SHOWN ON SAID
LAST TAX ASSESSMENT RECORDS BY DEPOSITING THEM IN AN OFFICIAL
o_z=~
UNITED STATES MAIL RECEPTACLE ON THE 12 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2001.
GAIL A. KUNDINGER, CIT CLERK
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS
clft/f DAYOF ~ ,2001.
rv"'~ 1if -- .
MfRYP BLIC, MUSKEGON COUNTY, MICHIGAN
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES -~1_-~;?
~ J_- _0_._
2.___ _
ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY STUDY •.
BARCLAY, SHERMAN TO HACKLEY
The new construction of Barclay, Sherman to Barclay, see attached location map, was initiated
by the City. The proposed reconstruction of this section of Barclay is necessary due to the l
conditions of the existing pavement, which has deteriorated to a point where reconstruction is
necessary.
A memorandum from the Assessor's office, which addresses appraisal and benefits to abutting
properties, is attached.
The preliminary cost estimate for the work associated with paving is approximately $600,000
with the length of the project being approximately 2,477 lineal feet or 4,00.3 of assessable front
footage. This translates into an estimated improvement cost of$149.98 per assessable foot. The
assessment figure will be at a cost not to exceed $36.35 per front foot.
MUSKEGON COUNTY
173 E. APPLE AVE., BUILDING C, MUSKEGON, MICHIGAN 49442
(231) 724-6386
M C H G A N FAX (231) 724-1129
EQUALIZATION DEPARTMENT
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Kenneth J. Hulka, Chair
Bill Gill, Vice Chair
Paul Baade
Douglas Bennett
Nancy G. Frye
Jacob 0. Funkhouser
James J. Kobza
Louis McMurray January 17, 2001
Clarence Start • •
Mohammed Al-Shatel, City Engmeer
City of Muskegon
933 Terrace Street
Muskegon, MI 49443
'
Mr.' Al-Shatel:
In accordance with your request, I have examined the proposed special
assessment district entailing the reconstruction of Barclay Street between
Sherman Avenue and Hackley Avenue. The purpose of this analysis is to
document the reasonableness of this special assessment district by identifying
and quantifying any accrued benefits. It is subject to the normal governmental
restrictions of escheat, taxation, police power and eminent domain. The effective
date is January 17, 2001.
In conclusion, it is my opinion that the special assessment amounts justly and
reasonably represents the accrued benefits to the properties encompassed by this
project. The amounts reflect the sum of the immediate estimated value
enhancement and the intrinsic value that will accrue from an overall increase in
property values due to an improved quality of life created by the proposed
project. As previously presented, the proposed special assessment district
encompasses a mixture of properties, but the front foot rate of$36.35 appears
reasonable in light of analysis that indicates a possible enhancement of$37.37.
The conclusions are based upon the data presented within this limited analysis in
restricted format, and on supporting information in my files.
Sincerely,
b::.~MAE1
Senior Appraiser
TDD (231) 722-4103 • An EEO I ADA I AA Employer
recycled paper
' Benefit Analysis for the Barclay Street Reconstruction Project
'I :- . -
TRUE CASH VAJ_UE ($)*
- .. ,·'
. .,:':' .
,,..,,' : ·. ,-·> •. ,,,·.- ' . . ~
TableB
Front Foot Benefit Calculations
BENEFIT% B1:1111:fllJ•)* .!:'RO.NT f'OOTAGI"§~ i::~§;£.tRd,rJ~>
;: ~}-~·f·t;:. \j;£;,'.(~{)(\tt::F
I 4.0% $183,220 37.37
I • Aggregate of all properties in the district.
I However, the topography of parcel numbers 24-036-400-0014-00 and 24-036-400-0016-00
severely inhibits complete development of these properties. There is a significant amount of
land area in the ravine parallel to Ruddiman Creek. Therefore, it is recommended that the
I assessable frontage of these parcels be reduced by 50%. No other adverse or extraordinary
conqitions were apparent.
I SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
I Generally, a special assessment district will be upheld unless there is a substantial or
unreasonable disparity between the assessment amount and the value of the land as improved.
In Dixon Road Group vs City of Novi... 426 Mich 390; 395 NW2d 211 (1996) the court
I invalidated a special assessment where the assessed value was 2.6 times greater than, "the
general rule is well settled that the benefits which property will derive from a local
improvement should be determined by the difference in the market value of the property
I before and after the making of the improvement" ( Dixon, at 399). The appraiser in Dixon
presented evidence showing the likely increase in land values, and concluded the assessment
amount to be 2.6 times greater than the resulting increase ( Dixon, at 395-96). The court was
I able to rely on competent evidence to determine the proportionality of the assessment to the
increase, ultimately reaching a conclusion that it was substantially and unreasonably
•I
disproportionate .
For example, adding a swimming pool to a property might cost money (both initially
and during operation); however, the homeowner may receive more money upon resale of the
property if it has a pool. This is the nature of investments and improvements to realty.
In determining the validity of a special assessment the issue is whether or not there is a
reasonable proportionality between the additional value added and the cost imposed. A
I property owner is probably accurate in concluding that people will not relocate to the special
assessment district solely because of this improvement. Regardless of motive, a prospective
purchaser of realty will pay more for enhancements that add value to the land, and less for less
I valuable land. The type of improvements on land values within the assessment district will
determine which result will occur.
I
I
1/16/01 8 Barclayspc.doc
I
MUSKEGON
;\ffi, matiH' .-\dion
231/72-1-6703
F.\.\/722-121-1
.\.,_,,,_,~or
2Jl/72-l-<,70S
F.\.\/726-51/il
0
l'IIH'h:r~
(
2J I /72-1-(, 'IIJ
January 12, 2001
F.\\.'726-% 17
Ci, ii Sl'n in·
2Jli72-l-<,716
F.\.\/72-1-4405 West ~Uchlgan's Shoreline City
2J ! /7 2-1-(, 705
F.\\/72-1--117,'i
('0111111. ,I.:: 'l'il!h.
2J1·"'2-l-h~17
I-' \\:72(,-25111 Parcel Number - - - - - - - -: at --~-----
En\!illl'l"rin,g
2Jll72-l-(,707 NOTICE OF HEARING ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
F. \.\/7 2 7-<,')11-I
Finann·
2JJ,".'2-t-l,'IJ
Dear Property Owner:
F \\;72-1-67(,S
Vin· lh'Jl!.
The Muskegon City Commission is considering whether or not to create a special
2J I .'72-1-67')2 assessment district which would assess your property for the following paving project:
F.\\/72-l-6'JS5
lncollll' Ta.\
2311724-(,770
Barclay Street, Sherman Avenue to Hackley Avenue.
F.-\:\/72-1-6768
Info. sy~tl'ms The proposed special assessment district will be located as follows:
2Ji/72-H7-I-I
F. \\./72 2--13!1 I
All parcels abutting Barclay Street 90' north of the north ROW line of Sherman Avenue
l.l'bun· Sl'n·in·
231/72-1-670-1
to the south ROW line of Hackley Avenue.
F.-\\/72-1-11%
\l,111,1J!l'r•~ Officl'
It is proposed that a portion of the above improvement will be paid by special
231172-1-672-1 assessment against properties in the aforementioned district. Following are conditions
F \\.1722-121-1
of the proposed special assessment which are important to you.
\ la~ or's Office
2J1172-l-67HI
F \\/722-L!I-I Public Hearings
An initial public hearing to consider the creation of a special assessment district will be
2Jl 1 72-l-h715
I· \_\('2h-25UJ held at the City of Muskegon City Commission Chambers on January 23, 2001 at 5:30
l'!nnnin\!1 Zoninl!
P.M. You are encouraged to appear at this hearing, either in person, by agent or in
23 l .'7 2-1-(, 7112 writing to express your opinion, approval, or objection concerning the proposed special
F.\\172-1-/,'iNSE CARD
,,, . .-.' ... .
To have youf\i~te count, pl~ase •
Return This Card By: January 23, 2001
Project Title: Barclay Street, Sherman Avenue to Hackley Avenue.
Project Description: All parcels abutting Barclay Street 90' north of the north ROW line of
Sherman Avenue to the south ROW line of Hackley Avenue.
!NSTRUCTIOMS
If you wish to have your written vote included as part of the tabulation of votes forwarded to
the City Commission for the scheduled public hearing, please return this card by the date
indicated above. To use this response card please indicate whether you Oppose or Favor
this special assessment project, sign the form and return it to the City Clerk's Office. To
return this card by mail, simply fold on the dotted lines so the address on the reverse side is
showing. Be sure to seal the form with a small piece of tape or staple prior to mailing.
6_;;sessment Information
Property Address: 2297 BARCLAY ST
Parcel Number 24~83°1-000°0028~10 .··
MAP Number: 24-30-36-402-019
Assessable Frontage: 95 Feet
Estimated Front Foot Cost: $36.35 per Foot
ESTIMATED TOT AL COST $3,453.25
Property Description
VINCE-ANN SUB-DIVISION# 1 LOT 28, EXCEPT THEW 120 FT
Your vote COUNTS!
Please vote either in favor or opposed to the Special Assessment Street Paving Project.
j2],·
.'·
Owner
I AM IN FAVOR
! H. .\.
f)
-,--..it)·
Signatu/;Z,;, .·
v
r. . ,, ..I · ,--, 1
K?/r~;:6::,-4&;1 Owner
;zj ..:;L ?:>{; ~1.~%!..- Signature
1,· •1'
1AM OPPOSED
•
Address ~l 11? / ,{11,f/i L-iJ.,fL f;; Address
r•_,!;._,;•,:;,:_"lc\l.D J;)HN F 13
Thank you for taking your time to vote on this important issue.
.·o·, l
'.-.-,- 'i
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
HEARING RESPONSE CARD
To have your vote count, please
Return This Card By: January 23, 2001
Project Title: Barclay Street, Sherman Avenue to Hackley Avenue.
Project Description: All parcels abutting Barclay Street 90' north of the north ROW line of
Sherman Avenue to the south ROW line of Hackley Avenue.
!NSTRUCT!ONS
If you wish to have your written vote included as part of the tabulation of votes forwarded to
the City Commission for the scheduled public hearing, please return this card by the date
indicated above. To use this response card please indicate whether you Oppose or Favor
this special assessment project, sign the form and return it to the City Clerk's Office. To
return this card by mail, simply fold on the dotted lines so the address on the reverse side is
showing. Be sure to seal the form with a small piece of tape or staple prior to mailing.
Assessment Information
Property Address: 2330 VINCENT DR
Parcel Number 24-831-000-0030-00
MAP Number: 24-30-36-402-012
Assessable Frontage: 122.65 Feet
Estimated Front Foot Cost: $36.35 per Foot
ESTIMATED TOTAL COST $4,458.33
Property Description
VINCE-ANN SUB-DIVISION # 1 LOT 30
Your vote COUNTS!
Please vote either in favor or opposed to the Special Assessment Street Paving Project.
Owner •
1AM IN FAVOR
------------- Owner
I AM OPPOSED
,
Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Signature l.,,,B.!:.:::M.:=::..:...:;:::..!:M~~•~~~:.....~
1o.. \ ; \c..,
~G
Address Address ;2.3.;;,C I) U'(\,(.u)
4
Thank you for taking your time to vote on this important issue.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
HEARING RESPONSE CARD
To have your vote count, please
Return This Card By: January 23, 2001
Project Title: Barclay Street, Sherman Avenue to Hackley Avenue.
Project Description: All parcels abutting Barclay Street 90' north of the north ROW line of
Sherman Avenue to the south ROW line of Hackley Avenue.
INSTRUCTIONS
if yciu wish to have your written vote included as pare of the tabulation of votes forwarded to
the City Commission for the scheduled public hearir:g, please return this card by the date
indicated above. To use this response card please indicate whether you Oppose or Favor
this special assessment project, sign the form and return it to the City Clerk's Office. To
.return this card by mail, simply fold on the dotted lines so the address on the reverse side is
showing. Be sure to seal the form with a small piece of tape or staple prior to mailing.
Assessment Information··
. P1pperty Address:•· 4401 'N HAGKL!=:YAVE
Parcel Number 24-830-000-0023-00
M.f1P Number:, 24-30-36-401-023
Asses.sable Frontage: 66.77 Feet
Estimated Front Foot Cost: $36.35 per Foot
ESTIMATED TOTAL COST $2,427.09
Property Description
VINCE ANN SUB DIVISION LOT 23
Your vote COUNTS!
,. Jl\lVll!')fAVOH
·.
•
Please vote either in favor or opposed to the Special Assessment Street Paving Project.
.
! AfVI OPPOSED ~
. /
Owner
Signature ,_ _ _ _ Signature _._....,.•;.;.•..
-- -.--) ,'---~:':'.'. ·,~--•~;--·- .
,? ~-~··-.
· ,""·,,....~-"•:;..·---.;;l..:.-,:...
,)
·.·.;;·•c..
~:--✓ t-,'
/
: .'--;;;;;'
;...__ _
/""_S,_.
Address
-·-------=~=-~ Address • •i r' '
Thank you for taking your time to vote en this important issue.
H-1312 BARCLAY STREET, SHERMAN TO HACKLEY
PROPERTY OWNER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT RESPONSE TABULATION
total of 19 parcels
FOR OPPOSE
FEET PERCENTAGE 13 24-30-36-402-019 95 1 24-30-36-402-011 100
18 24-30-36-402-018 95 2 24-30-36-402-008 95
2300 24-30-36-400-033 250 4 24-30-36-402-012 122.65
TOTAL ASSESSABLE FRONT FOOTAGE 4000.300 ""* 7 24-30-36-402-007 72.83
12 24-30-36-400-002 602.85
FRONT FEET OPPOSED 1284.25 32.10% 15 24-30-36-402-017 102.15
17 24-30-36-402-013 122
RESPONDING FRONT FEET IN FAVOR 440.000 11.00% 19 24-30-36-401-028 66.77
NOT RESPONDING - FRONT FEET IN FAVOR 2276.050 56.90%
TOTAL FRONT FEET IN FAVOR 2716.050 67.90%
TOTALS 440 1284.25
•-INCLUDES ONLY 50% OF PARCELS 24-30-36-400-031 & 24-30-36-400-004 PER THE ASSESSOR'S RECOMMENDATION
TABULATED AS OF: 01124/01 10:21 AM