CCP 06-26-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. .. ,~'fTYCO~ . JUNE 12. 1995 .J. Mr. P:J.w Tavernier, 1~1 COWlty Road FW~ inquiIed as to wbetherTl1e fund disI1ilned wouid . be fixed or variable. Mayor Probst indicated tile monies received from tile Coumy is a fixed nw:nIler, the otb.er funding areas bave a potential to be somewhat variable. . Mayor Probst indicated although the funds from MSA is somewhat variable, thm: will be eigbt additional projectS upcomiDg. torating "I-'I"O).;........ly S1,000,OOO in Coumy projCClS tbaltb.e City . must plan for in = of possible cost paxticipation. Mr. Tavernier questioned ifTl1e ~--..o:nts are based on use or on benefu. Mayor Probst indicated . the use of the I"v!'erty is identified in the zoning of the property, !!lis property is zoned Resit1entiaL The :lSsessments are based on beneIit. . City Attorney Filla commented that Mr. Mikacl Benttondorf has reviewed the project, and after a gene.-.ti ~ believes the benefit S1JllllOrlS the assessment in regards to increase in value of I the properties. Mr. Howard VanderWyst.1716 COUDty Road F West, did not believe the increase in value to I bis home would meet or exceed the ~ST(l"lll' levied on his property: He found it hard to believe tile City could assess S3,000 for a non residential meet. .. Mr. Huy Pham, 1761 COWlty Road F West, also did not believe the recollStItlCtion to be beneficial. He is against the high assessment to his property. . Mr. Greg Jones. 1691 Crystal Avenue, believed there was an = in tb.e arithmetic of the ca!cu1ations of the project. He believed the City has an oppornmity to assess differently. He noted in comparison witb. other communities he felt the assessmentS were un:J:air. . Mayor Probst noted in speaking witb. tb.e Mayor from Mounds View, tb.ey are establi~hiT1g assessmentS ax tw<HlliIds cost of the improvements. instead of one-baIf cOst of the improvements, . as is the case in Arden Hills. . Mr. Ken Schacht, 1683 County Road F W~ expressed concern for the cost of the project. He didn't believe re..sidents should be levied so harshly, He believed the principles of Tl1e City have been fragmented. I :vir. Schacht said tb.e County indicared they would resurface tb.e road berore tb.e rumback.. but the Ci ry ,refused and wanted the road recOIlSttllCted. I Mr, Schacht indicated he did not believe tb.e residents should pay for a road thaI is not a purely residential road, but a residential/commercial roadway. I Mr. Schacht did nOt feel he was the only benefuctor to tb.e recol1SlrUcrion. ."UJ.y one who may cravel .. tile road is a benefactor and the cOSt of improvements should be spread over all those who benefit. I