My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 07-10-2000
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
CCP 07-10-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:16:08 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 1:24:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION - JUNE 19,2000 <br /> <br />DRAFT <br /> <br />Acting Mayor Larson recognized those property owners in attendance at the meeting, and <br />opened the meeting for their comments. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Dee Rushenberg, 3168 Shoreline Lane, stated that the neighborhood had, in 1993, been <br />vehemently opposed to putting a street through, and that it was the understanding of <br />property owners that cul-de-sacs were going to be installed. Ms. Rushenberg stated that <br />she does not share the opinion that the easement area in front of her home is in fact a <br />street, but that there had existed a "gentleman's agreement" to allow the City access to <br />it's lift station. Ms. Rushenberg further stated that she feels the driveway (street) is <br />owned by her and her neighbor, Mr. Robert Wesslund, and feels that there needs to be a <br />determination made about the actual amount of property in question. Ms. Rushenberg <br />stated that the property owners had appreciated Mr. Lynch serving as a mediator between <br />the parties. <br /> <br />Robert Wesslund, 3167 Shoreline Lane, stated that he feels he should receive a fair <br />market value for the property, and that seemed to be in dispute between the property <br />owners and developers. <br /> <br />Further discussion took place regarding the zoning of the property and its non- <br />conforming status; the date of the Subdivision approval by the City Council (May of <br />1999); and the extensive discussion by the City at that time, regarding the intent of the <br />City to develop the road, and connect both sections of road, and that the cul-de-sac was <br />temporary . <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />After further discussion, it was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to allow <br />the process to continue, with City Administrator Lynch offering to continue to serve as <br />mediator between the developers and property owners. Property owners were strongly <br />encouraged to continue resolution to avoid condemnation proceedings. It was the <br />consensus of the City Council that a definitive settlement needed to be reached by August <br />of 2001 at the latest, to avoid condemnation proceedings. <br /> <br />COUNCIL COMMENTS <br /> <br />Bev Aplikowski <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski referred the Councilmembers to a letter included in the <br />packet regarding the City's support for the New Brighton District Court facility being <br />continued. Staff was directed to prepare a letter of support on behalf of the City Council. <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski briefly shared information from the League of Minnesota <br />Cities annual conference entitled, "Building Quality Communities." <br /> <br />e <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.