|
divided it,t,, iwo projects, one for the townhomes and the other for the single family
<br />homos sir,.c~: ll~,~ street serving each type of land use are well defined. If the short
<br />segmcnt o !'( 'o bait Street between the Clinic and Bill's is considered a townhouse related
<br />street, thi:. al~-<o becomes easily assessable on a per unit basis. The remaining two
<br />devclop~ n,._~ ds ~'e not that easily resolved.
<br />
<br />Survey o~' either Communities:
<br />
<br />A sm'x, cy ~t ~lt mr communities was conducted and six cities responded with their
<br />townlv~,~sc :ts.~:ssment policies.
<br />
<br />,-.i~.l~,c.,/' - assesses on a per unit basis whenever possible.
<br />Al, q,lc (h.()ve policy varies based on type of project, type of units, and whether
<br />dri v~:...v:tys front on private or public streets. Generally, however they assess 60%
<br />of :~ si~,,lc family unit.
<br />/~[[,~t)t~t/l -The area of the tow~ouse development is divided by 18,500 square
<br />!i:,:( i;~ >ti-rive at an equivalent number of assessment shares. Pl~outh noted that
<br />,:~n ~ ;~i>03 project to~vnhome owners paid about 60% of what single family
<br />t1011! C(}'¢VIICI'S paid.
<br />,l.l,%}t,~,~,ood assesses single hmily on a unit basis, but co~ercial, indus~al
<br />amd ~l! Itl lmnily on a "comparable front foot "basis increased by a multiplier
<br />(5o% Il ,- townhomes). A single hmily home is assumed to have 75 feet on
<br />
<br />i~r,,~:,:t~t ~[ownhouscs are typically assessed 75% on a single family unit.
<br />I-;~ ir;.~~/..:,~ke~ assesses townhouse (condo) units the same as a single family unit.
<br />
<br />i)iscussim,;
<br />
<br />A rcvi,:w ~1 <~tl~er cities townbouse assessment policies suggest that the method currently
<br />proposed /,~' IP 04-14 (that thc 12 townhouse unit receive a single assessment share to
<br />divide m ~...)~ ~.t,~ i i~cmsolves) would be a substantial deviation from how other communities
<br />surveyc,.! _~r:: h mdli ng th e assessment of townhouse units Although there is variation
<br />fi'om om.: ;;~m~nunity to the next, for the most part townhouse units are treated much
<br />sim il a~' tr~ .'- i~-~ gl c Family units. However, there is usually some consideration given to the
<br />cconm,~i~z; ~l't't~red by the density of the townhouse development by offering these units a
<br />perccntag,: ,~'ii~c assessment applied to single family units. The justification for charging
<br />multi fro! ti I.~/tm its a ti'action of that assessed to a single family unit can be based upon the
<br />ratiom}l t l-~:~l lh.~s¢ units gcncratc fewer daily trips and therefore are benefited to a lesser
<br />degree.
<br />
<br />It would k,c: b~.z~.t to aggregate townhouse into individual projects wherever possible in
<br />order t~ b ~ ~no.;t co~sistcnt with our past policy of assessing subdivisions as individual
<br />pro. iccl.~; i,,:;caw;c of thc large variation in street servicing needs. This, however, would
<br />still lcav,: a :z(,~ple a difficult situations such as Sunfish Ponds and the current IP 04-14.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|