CC 09-13-1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Arden Hills Council 5 September 13, 1993 recoup the loss in tax revenue, all other taxpayers are affected by having to share the additional tax burden. Malone commented that Arden Hills operates on a very tight budget, but despite that fact, citizens will notice an increase in their tax bills to cover lost tax revenue resulting from commercial and industrial valuation reductions. PISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE ASSESSMENTS RELATING TO ARDEN PLACE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT & CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION ~93-44 Mayor Sather recalled that the City conducted hearings on the matter of Arden place drainage in the past, but no improvement project was ordered due to citizen objections. He noted that Council recently instructed staff and City engineers to revisit this matter and determine how best to improve the drainage situation surrounding the Arden Place neighborhood. Public Works Director Winkel reported that the City Engineer has updated the feasibility study of the Arden Place neighborhood, which was originally prepared in 1991. He added that various options for assessing a drainage improvement project for this neighborhood have been outlined, and staff is seeking Council direction as to assessments. Councilmember Probst noted that the Council has initiated the public hearing process in the matter of Arden Place Drainage Improvement of 1993 within this evening's consent calendar. He commented that the drainage problems of this neighborhood have not and will not simply go away, and he believes the City must go forward with a project. He suggested that Council consider a cost sharing formula whereby 50% of the project cost be paid by assessments and 50% be paid by the City's storm water management utility. He further suggested that the lion's share of the portion to be assessed be contributed by the owner of 1553 Arden Place, since the source of the problem appears to be that this drainage situation should have been corrected prior to development of 1553 Arden Place. Council concurred with Probst's general philosophy regarding paying for the project. Councilmember Malone emphasized that the storm water management utility was only recently established; in the past it was not available as a optional means of paying for a project of this type. Malone recalled that there were several properties proposed to be assessed when this project was considered in the past. He commented that 1553 Arden Place and 3487 and 3505 Ridgewood should definitely be assessed a portion of the cost of the improvement since they undeniably receive benefit.