My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 07-31-1995
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
CC 07-31-1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:07:41 PM
Creation date
11/3/2006 2:13:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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 />I <br />I. <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I- <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />Ie <br />I <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JULY 31,1995 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />Councilmember Ap1ikowski indicated she felt tl1e outlots and open space were a benefit to tl1e <br />residents and she would not be inclined to change the standard for the approximately $1,600 in <br />assessments. <br /> <br />Mr. Getty commented tl1ere are two cul-de-sacs on Walden Place and Hunters Court which are <br />public streets where tl1e only access is by way of Benton Way. He pointed out tl10se residents also <br />benefit from the open space of tl1e outlots. <br /> <br />Mr. Tom Harkness, 1123 Benton Way, indicated tl1e value of $1,600 today may be a very <br />different than a similar amount in the future based on inflation. He expressed eoncem tl1ere would <br />be a precedent established ti1at would be used in tl1e future. <br /> <br />Mr. Pistotnik reiterated tl1e precedent established is very important, not just tl1e money saved by tl1e <br />residents at this point. <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski asked if Walden Place and Hunters Court were part oftl1e Association. <br />Mr. Stonehouse indicated no, and tl1ey were assessed at $4 per linear foot. <br /> <br />Mr. Stonehouse indicated after checking the footage it appears there would be 480 feet pIus or minus <br />a few feet ti1at would be removed from the assessment. The assessment roll would be reduced by <br />$1,920 or $28.24 per unit. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst felt tl1e comer lot issue was valid, but did not have the information available regarding <br />the formula to re-evaluate the assessment. <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski indicated she was not ready to make a decision with the information <br />available. She asked if more information could be obtained and presented at tl1e next Council <br />meeting. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst indicated tl1e issue would be to establish how the formula should change. He indicated <br />once tl1e Council decides on tl1e way in which this development is assessed, this formula will also <br />be used in tl1e future, tl1erefore he felt tl1e Council should approach this issue witl1 caution. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst did agree witl1 tl1e fact ti1at this development is unique and tl1e Council needs to be <br />confident witl1 tl1e standard or formula chosen to apply to this development. <br /> <br />Councilmember Keim felt tl1e correct formula has already been chosen, and tl1e development is not <br />going to change. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst asked if the development is built out completely. Mr. Pritsinger indicated he would <br />need to review tl1e Planned Unit Development, typically there is no development on areas designated <br />as ouflots. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.