Laserfiche WebLink
<br />---------- <br /> ...10. '. <br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JUNE 10. 1996 D'/'f.:;)8/>, , I <br />~ .c:i~' <br /> I'{' <br />Ronald Christianson, 1428 Arden Oaks Court: Owner believes his property is being double -. <br />assessed for improvements on both Pascal Avenue and Arden Oaks Court. Mr. Stonehouse <br />recommended a reduction in the assessment to reflect the actual footage of the improvement <br />along Pascal A venue. He reported that Mr. Christianson appeared to be satisfied with this . <br />resolution. <br />Steve and Carol Herbst, 3799 McCracken Lane: O"'TIer believes that assessment calculation is I <br />higher than the average since it is a large lot with a sewer easement across the backyard. Mr. <br />Stonehouse stated he was unable to reach the Herbsts but believes this lot has two issues: the <br />Assessment Policy calculation for odd-shaped lots; and, the sanitary sewer easement crossing the . <br />rear corner lot, resulting in a net "loss" of about 28% of buildable lot area. Mr. Stonehouse <br />explained there is currently no means to reduce this assessment under the City's Assessment I <br />Policy. <br />Mr. Stonehouse stated he spoke with all residents except Steven and Carol Herbst with respect to I <br />what his recommendation to Council would be. He summarized his recommendation is that the <br />assessment is prepared correctly for the four corner lots and there is no means within the City's <br />Assessment Policy to make a change. The City will address the drainage issues with the Barnier I <br />property. With the Christensen property, Mr. Stonehouse recommended a reduction in the <br />assessment to reflect the actual footage of improvement along Pascal A venue, as was used for all <br />other Pascal residents. This yields revised assessment amounts of$I,168.53 for the Pascal .. <br />Avenue reconstruction and $257.13 for the Arden Oaks Court overlay portion. <br />Mr. Stonehouse stated he informed these residents they could attend the meeting tonight to I <br />address the Council but they felt comfortable in having him convey their concerns. <br />Mr. Filla advised that since the district court records of the Behr assessment appeal are at least 10 I <br />years old, the court destroyed them so they are not available to add light to that assessment <br />appeal; however, the appeal was prior to the City's current Assessment Policy. I <br />Mr. Stonehouse suggested, on the Roach assessment at 1628 Oak Avenue, that the assessable <br />footage be reduced to 148.75 feet and the assessment to $4,510.10 based on deep lot calculation . <br />versus odd-shaped lot calculation. <br />Council member Aplikowski questioned when the Assessment Policy was adopted. Mr. Probst I <br />answered it was in October of 1990. Councilmember Aplikowski stated no one should be <br />"grandfathered" from special assessments because it would establish an adverse precedent. <br />Councilmember Malone, for the record, reviewed staffs recommendation for each property under I <br />consideration and stated he believes it is appropriate. <br />Mr. Filla advised it would be appropriate for the Council to consider each of the seven parcels I <br />and either reject or accept the appeal, then consider the proposed resolution. .. <br /> I <br />