Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS <br /> MEMORANDUM <br /> DATE: July 12, 1996 <br /> TO: Mayor and City Council <br /> FROM: Brian Fritsinger, City Administrator@ <br /> SUBJECT: Review of Arden Hills Assessment Policy <br /> Background <br /> Attached the Council will find a copy of the Arden Hills Assessment Manual (policy) which was <br /> adopted in November, 1990. As part of the 1996 Council/Department Head retreat, the Council <br /> indicated it would like to review the policy after the 1996 street projects were adopted. With the <br /> assessment process now complete and planning underway for the 1997 street improvements, the <br /> council may wish to now review this policy. <br /> Unit Assessment vs. Front Foota!!e Assessment Approaches <br /> One of the issues commonly raised by residents is the use of the Front Footage Assessment <br /> . rather than a Per Unit Assessment. Some of the arguments made by proponents for using a Unit <br /> Assessment are: <br /> . reduces engineering costs <br /> . easier to support through appraisals <br /> . easier for citizens to understand (no formulas) <br /> . historic costs can be used <br />- . more equitable <br />- Some of the arguments against using a Per Unit Assessment are: <br />I . fairness to those with smaller lots <br /> . impact of curb and gutter on small vs. large lots <br />I Should the Council support the use of a Per Unit Assessment, the current policy can still be used. <br /> The Per Unit Assessment would make most sense in similarly situated lots which can not be <br /> subdivided. A simple paragraph or two can be amended to allow for the option of using a Per <br />I Unit Assessment. <br />I Other Issues Raised by Residents <br /> I. Corner Lots <br /> The assessment of corner lots continues to be questioned by residents. Specifically, the <br />I. access, or lack thereof, of the lot to the improved street is a concern. <br />I <br />I <br />