Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. Arden Hills Council 5 September 28, 1992 <br /> unbuildable and has been deemed so for years, that the City <br /> has confirmed that fact. He added that during development <br /> of the area some problems were encountered and contour <br /> changes were made so that water would f1 ow to the northwest <br /> cornet of the property. <br /> Thornton stated that there is not a constant water problem, <br /> but that the problem only exists as a result of torrential <br /> t-alns or snow melt. He commented that when an improvement <br /> project was first considered, the estimated cost of such as <br /> project was around $11,000 and now that cost lS around <br /> $32,000. Graham explained that the $32,000 figure reflects <br /> the chosen route for the storm sewer, which is somewhat more <br /> expensive than options considered earlier. <br /> Thornton submitted written objections to the assessments <br /> from the parties he represented and drew attention to court <br /> cases highlighted within the presentation booklet which <br /> illustrated principles supporting the objections. He <br /> explained that the standard required for a "special benefit" <br /> assessment is that the value of the property is increased; <br /> he stated that the residents he represents and local real <br />. estate agent Evie Dunn all agree that the proposed <br /> improvement will not lncrease the values of the properties <br /> proposed to be assessed. He added that the opinion of the <br /> City's appraisal, as outlined in their September 24, 1992 <br /> letter, agrees that the "cost does not necessarily relate <br /> di rectl y to benefit". <br /> Councilmember Malone commented t.hat it may be relevant to <br /> know all the facts surrounding the court cases cited rather <br /> than to take the information out of context; that knowing <br /> all the facts of the cases may be helpful in making a <br /> decision on this issue. <br /> Thornton stated that a homeowner has the right to have his <br /> property drain, that drainage does not constitute "benefit". <br /> He added that water flow from his property has not changed <br /> in 25-30 years. He commented that the City has some <br /> responsibility and the problem was brought to the City's <br /> attention many times. He added that the development of the <br /> area was done by a private contractor, so that contractor <br /> should also be responsible. <br /> , <br /> Councilmember Malone pointed out that Thornton has stated <br /> that the City is responsible and t.hat. the developer is <br /> responsible; he asked for clarification. Thornton stated <br />. that his presentation is a compilation of the positions of <br /> all the residents he represents, and although they all agree <br /> t.hat. t.heir properties wi 11 not receive benefit and <br /> assessments are not proper, they have differing thoughts as <br /> to who is responsible to correct the problem. Thornton <br /> .- <br />