Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />MARCH 31, 2003 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Jerome Pearson, 1121 Amble Drive, stated in 1995 the City performed extensive <br />road work on Amble Drive and, at that time questioned why Amble Circle was not <br />included. He stated he was currently being assessed for 98 feet on the east end of <br />his property. He further stated that the City had already repaired 21 feet of that <br />end of his property when Amble Drive was repaired; therefore, he requested an <br />adjustment to his assessment. He asked when the improvements were scheduled <br />to begin. He also stated he has had car shows on the street for the past four years <br />and if the road construction occurred in July, he would have to move his car show. <br /> <br />Mr. Moore replied they had taken the car show into consideration when <br />scheduling improvrnents. <br /> <br />Jim Danielson, 3238 Hamline Avenue North, asked how assessments for <br />properties that had no frontage property were calculated. He stated he had 70 feet <br />of actual frontage property and he was being charged for 111 feet. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Brown replied the frontage footage was calculated based on the shape of the <br />lots. He stated he would check Mr. Danielson's calculation. He responded to the <br />question as to how the assessments were figured for lots with no frontage. He <br />noted those properties would be assessed according to a certain calculation <br />formula. <br /> <br />Wally LindQuist, 1111 Inl!:erson Road, asked how the PMP project was funded. <br /> <br />Mr. Parrish replied the City internally financed all of the improvements, but the <br />bulk of the improvement came out of the non-assessable improvement fund, as <br />well as State money and MSA funds. He noted in terms of interest rate, the City <br />had charged 8 percent in the past, which was reflective of the market rate. He <br />indicated the City had revised the interest rate by reducing it to 6.5 percent. <br /> <br />Mr. Lindquist stated two years ago residents were against this project and the <br />Council voted against proceeding with the improvement. He asked since the <br />Council voted down the project at that time, why this project was being brought up <br />agam. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski replied the Council had never intended for this project not be <br />completed. <br />