Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Arden Hills Council <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />June 29, 1992 <br /> <br />The following public comments/questions were received: <br /> <br />Deb Thornton, 3510 Siems Court: My neighbors and I will <br />file a case in District Court if we are assessed on the <br />basis that we are receiving no benefit and no increased <br />market value. This problem is between the City and the two <br />homeowners who are experiencing water problems. An <br />appraiser would agree that neighbors receive no benefit and <br />therefore cannot be assessed. <br /> <br />Mayor Sather reminded the public that this evening's meeting <br />is to receive input with regard to the project itself, that <br />assessment concerns will be addressed at a later assessment <br />hearing, if such a hearing is necessary. <br /> <br />Arnold Lindberg, 3520 Siems Court: I concur with Ms. <br />Thornton. The option of routing to Lake Johanna Beach club <br />has merit. The option of a direct route to Lake Johanna <br />involves easement and ecological concerns. While there is a <br />definite need to address the drainage issue, my contention <br />is that it is the City's problem and should be a paid for by <br />the City. I will fight an assessment. <br /> <br />Esther Dant, 3511 Ridgewood Road: I concur with Ms. <br />Thornton. When our neighborhood was developed I was of the <br />understanding that the existing pipe simply needed cleaning. <br />The City is responsible to pay the cost of addressing the <br />issue. <br /> <br />Brad Lis, 1548 Arden Place: Will my property value be <br />raised? There is no existing easement through my property <br />if the direct route to Lake Johanna is used. Has Rice <br />Creek Watershed District approved the direct route option? <br />I would like to see their study. Because of fertilizer run- <br />off, etc, the channel to Lake Johanna will turn into a swamp <br />if the direct route option is used. <br /> <br />Engineer Graham reported that in discussions with Rice creek <br />Watershed District they indicated acceptance of the direct <br />route option; they do have studies available to the public <br />as to the effect of fertilizers on water supplies. <br /> <br />Dale Noyed, 3505 Ridgewood Road: Why has the cost of the <br />original option increased? The existing pipe does drain <br />somewhat. Why not just clean it out? Since the existing <br />pipe has been in place for years wouldn't the City pick up <br />the costs now? <br /> <br />Mayor Sather stated that, generally speaking, the City's <br />assessment policy includes a cost sharing procedure whereby <br />the City typically pays a sizable portion of costs. <br />However, the Council has not deliberated as to how the costs <br />