My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05 Lake Crook
City-of-Paris
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2001-2010
>
2005
>
01 January
>
2005 01-20
>
05 Lake Crook
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/17/2005 11:15:09 AM
Creation date
1/14/2005 6:53:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGENDA
Item Number
05 Lake Crook
AGENDA - Type
MISCELLANEOUS
Description
Lake Crook Development Study
AGENDA - Date
1/20/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
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
<br />- . <br /> <br />~ of Paris <br /> <br />Study of Lake Crook <br /> <br />March, 2001 <br />I <br /> <br />are close to $25,000 per lot (counting' ,land, marketing, engineering, and construction) and <br />assuming the developer will want to make a profit (reasonable assumption), then the retail cost <br />of the lot will likely have to be at least $35,000 and as high as $50,000. These prices exceed any <br />lot prices being seen in the Paris market today although they are not exceptional for larger cities <br />across the state. Assuming then that builders will choke back their tears and pay these prices for <br />the lots, the minimum price home likely to built on Lake Crook will be $140,000 to $200,000. <br />From the table above, the largest builder in tenns of volume in Paris, is not building in this price <br />range, In fact, only twelve homes per year are being built in Paris in the $140,000 range by two <br />of these four builders. The inventory created by a north shore development under Option 3 then <br />is not seven years but a ridiculous 45 years EXCLUDING OUTSIDE INFLUENCES. <br /> <br />Specifically, this outside influence would have to come in the form of a professional developing <br />and marketing team. <br /> <br />4.0.5 Referendum No\v. The argument has been posed that the city is getting the cart before <br />the horse in doing a feasibility study before it even has authority to sell the land. The proponents <br />of this argument say the city should have a referendumpllrery on the issue of whether or not <br />land should be sold and not debate the selling price, the developer's character, and his proposed <br />development plan. We do not concur with this argument. <br /> <br />.." <br /> <br />The other side of this coin is that voters, just like they do on bond issues, \villlikely want to judge <br />the merits of the sale knowing full \vell what is likely to be built on the site. We cannot conceive <br />of a voter not wanting full disclosure anymore than \ve can conceive that they will issue the city <br />staff a blank check to sell as many bonds and do whatever bond-funded activities the staff and <br />council \vant to do at the moment. <br /> <br />Page 40 of 45 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.