CCP 03-20-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Mayor and Council members. On behalf of the Josephine Hills Association ("Association") I would like to identify and discuss our objections to the City of Arden Hills' ("City") proposed assessment of $7,355.50 to the property owned by the Association and discuss why the Association believes the City should exempt this property trom the City's Assessment Roll Before identifying the Association's objections to the proposed assessment, we request claritlcation on the proposed footage rate. The Assessment Roll attached to the November 12,2002 Feasibility Report identifies a rate 01'$47 per foot for property along the City's right-of-way on Ingerson Court The line item on page 2 of the City's March 7, 2003 Notice of proposed assessments also identifies a rate of $47 per fool. However, the next sentence in the Notice states the rate is $51 per fool. We assume that the $51 per foot rate is a typographical error in the City's Notice. We request clarification from the City and Council on this issue. . The City's Assessment Roll is inaccurate and overstates the amount of footage owned by the Association along the City's Ingerson COlllt right-of-way. According to various maps of the City's right-of-way along Ingerson Court, there is 126' along the east portion and 30' along the south portion for a total of 156' of right-ot~way land, not 156.5' as stated in the City's Notice. Further, documents of record, tllcd with the Register of Deeds, Ramsey County, State of Minnesota, clearly show that the Association does not own the above amount of footage along the City's Ingerson Court right-oj~way. tn 1965,30' abulting the east portion of the City's right-of-way was sold to the then owners of Lot 14, Block 4, Joscphine Hills. In ]965,30' ofland abutting the south portion of the City's right-of-way was sold to the then owners of Lot 16A, Block 4, Josephine Hills. 'tile total amount of footage the Association now owns is approximately 96' not 156.5' as the City has identified in the Notice of Assessment . The City's Assessment Policy adopted in November 1990 allows for the City to delcte land from its Assessment Roll "ifin its opinion the land cannot be developed and/or the improvement does not provide benefit" [NOTE: page 6 of the City's Assessment policy] or if the assessment "produces unfair and undesirable results." [NOTE page 3.J For the following reasons, we believe that the property owned by "7'f t 'M t w" ~ 2- I " ,2 B