CCP 10-13-1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Arden Hills Council 5 September 28, 1992 unbuildable and has been deemed so for years, that the City has confirmed that fact. He added that during development of the area some problems were encountered and contour changes were made so that water would flow to the northwest corner of the property. Thornton stated that there is not a constant water problem, but that the problem only exists as a result of torrential ralns or snow melt. He commented that when an improvement project was first considered, the estimated cost of such as project was around $11,000 and nOW that cost is around $32,000. Graham explained that the $32,000 figure reflects the chosen route for the storm sewer, which is somewhat more expensive than options considered earlier. Thornton submitted written objections to the assessments from the parties he represented and drew attention to court cases highlighted within the presentation booklet which illustrated principles supporting the objections. He explained that the standard required for a "special benefit" assessment is that the value of the property is increased; he stated that the residents he represents and local real . estate agent Evie Dunn all agree that the proposed improvement will not increase the values of the properties proposed to be assessed. He added that the opinion of the City's appraisal, as out! ined in their September 24, 1992 letter, agrees that the "cost does not necessarily relate di rectl y to benefit". Councilmember Malone commented that it may be relevant to know all the facts surrounding the court cases cited rather than to take the information out of context; that knowing all the facts of the cases may be helpful in making a decision On this issue. Thornton stated that a homeowner has the right to have his property drain, that drainage does not constitute "benefit", He added that water flow from his property has not changed in 25-30 year-so He commented t.hat the City has some responsibility and the problem was brought to the City's attent.ion many times. He added that the development of the area was done by a private contractor, so that contractor should also be responsible. , Councilmember Malone pointed out that Thornton has stated that t.he Cit.y is responsible and that t.he developer is responsible; he asked for clarification. Thornton stat.ed . that. his present.ation is a compilation of the positions of all the residents he represents, and although t.hey all agree that their properties will not receive benefit and assessments are not proper, they have differing thoughts as to who is responsible to correct the problem. Thornton