Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. .. <br /> Dlr~ <br />I ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JUNE 10. 1996 .7-6."}.... <br /> .., ""t <br />f' <br /> MOTION: Aplikowski moved and Keim seconded a motion to authorize submittal of the Met <br /> Council Environmental Services Grant Application. The motion passed <br /> unanimously (4-0). <br />I D. Resolution #96-34a. Adopting Final Assessment Roll (5 Years Amortization) For <br />I Parcels 20. 33. 34 and 38 of the Reconstruction Improvements Proiect: and Parcel <br /> 46 of the Bituminous Overlay Proiect <br />I Mayor Probst noted no residents were present to address this issue. <br /> Mr. Stonehouse explained there are six remaining assessments to be determined and then used an <br />I overhead to point out the locations of these properties. He explained the issues are as follows: <br /> James D. Johnson, 1535 Lake Johanna: This property has access from Lake Johanna Boulevard <br />I and owner believes he receives "no" benefit from the Oak Avenue improvement. Mr. <br /> Stonehouse advised this assessment was calculated in accordance with the City's current policy <br /> and there was no means within the policy to adjust this assessment. <br />I Eugene D. Schinidt, 1628 Chatham Avenue: This property has access from Chatham Avenue <br /> and owner believes the street should have been overlaid in 1991. Mr. Stonehouse explained this <br />Ie is a corner lot and Mr. Schmidt believes the odd-shaped lot calculation resulted in an inordinately <br /> high assessment. Mr. Stonehouse further explained Mr. Schmidt's comments related to the <br />I corner lot calculations so he explained the assessment calculation. Mr. Schmidt now understands <br /> the formula but remains concerned that the last segment of McCracken Lane was not overlaid in <br /> 1991 when the rest of that segment was overlaid. <br />I David Barnier, 1624 Chatham Avenue: This property has access from Chatham Avenue and <br /> drainage problems that will be evaluated and corrected if possible. Mr. Stonehouse explained <br />I this is a corner lot and Mr. Barnier does not believe he should be assessed for McCracken Lane. <br /> Also, Mr. Barnier is also concerned with the cost of the project since he has nine children and has <br /> concerns about being able to pay college tuition. <br />I Rhonda Behr, 1401 County Road E: Owner states a previous street assessment was successfully <br /> appealed during construction of Arden Oaks Drive. Mr. Stonehouse explained this property is a <br />I corner lot with access from County Road E and would be assessed $561 for side yard <br /> improvements on Arden Oaks. Mr. Stonehouse advised he informed Ms. Behr that the City did <br /> not have an Assessment Policy at the time she successfully appealed an assessment 10 or II <br />I years ago when Arden Oaks was constructed, and the proposed assessment is calculated <br /> according to the adopted Assessment Policy. Ms. Behr then suggested, because of the <br />I Assessment Policy change, she should be grandfathered from paying this assessment and that <br /> other residents on County Road E should also be grandfathered. <br />~ <br />I <br />