Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ARDEN HILLS CITY cm lNCIL WORKSESSION - MARCH 17. 1997 3 <br />. <br /> prepared by City Accountant Post. Discussions included the amount of cash available for <br /> the project; the possibility of dropping Hamline and/or Snelling A venues; and <br /> consideration of potential unit cost for future assessments rather than by front footage. <br /> Mayor Probst polled the Councilmembers at this time regarding reconstruction of the <br /> Harnline and Snelling portions of the project: <br /> Councilmember Hamline Snelling <br /> Aplikowski Drop Keep <br /> Hicks Drop Drop (from a budget standpoint*) <br /> Keim Drop Drop <br /> Malone Drop Drop <br /> Probst Drop Drop <br /> *Councilmember Hicks suggested that one or the other of these streets be considered this <br /> year, as they both will need to be reconstructed at some point. <br /> Mayor Probst requested clarification from City Administrator Fritsinger on several <br /> procedures regarding the public hearing process. Mr. Fritsinger addressed Mayor <br />. Probst's concerns that the public hearing was to gain public input from residents, and at <br /> that time, the Council could make the decision on the final scope of the project. <br /> Councilmembers again referred to the baseline and five alternatives and assumptions <br /> compiled by City Accountant Post. <br /> Mayor Probst questioned whether staff had been given sufficient direction this evening to <br /> prepare for the public hearing. The consensus of the Council was to keep the assessments <br /> in the $38.00 range, remove Hamline and Snelling from the project scope, and have <br /> several options available for presentation purposes at the public hearing. <br /> Consulting Engineers Stonehouse and Maurer were directed to calculate rates for all <br /> options and alternatives as discussed, in accordance with the City's current Assessment <br /> Policy. <br /> City Administrator Fritsinger addressed several public concerns which had been brought <br /> to his attention regarding the current assessment policy which included; corner lot <br /> assessments, lack of understanding regarding the property owners' ability to amortize the <br /> assessment, hardship deferrals, and cul-de-sacs. <br /> Councilmember Keirn brought to the attention of Councilmembers and staff that the <br />. County Assessor considers corner lots to contain no added value, particularly when <br /> improvements are completed on the side lot, not the front footage side of the house. <br />