My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-28-19-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
10-28-19-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/25/2019 10:52:20 AM
Creation date
10/25/2019 10:36:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
508
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
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION September 16, 2019 4 <br />Councilmember Holden wondered if they could ask a homeowner to let the City take the pump <br />out from their property. <br />Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer Blomstrom said the force main comes out of a <br />wall that the pump is connected to, and the panel sits on top of the retaining wall. <br />Councilmember McClung felt being as the City is a property owner on the lake we should pay <br />for a portion of the improvements that benefit our property. <br />Finance Director Bauman said the city can't tax themselves, so it would be like a street <br />assessment and the City's cost would be built into the costs the City is putting into the project. <br />Councilmember McClung said he would support an amount percentage equivalent to the amount <br />of property the City owns. <br />Councilmember Holmes felt because the retaining wall is on City property but the residents at <br />large can't use the lake, the City should pay a small percentage of the cost of the retaining wall. <br />Mayor Grant said we would have to determine if the City is part of the taxing district. <br />Councilmember McClung said he is willing to pay an amount based on the percentage of land <br />the City owns on the lake, not the full amount of the retaining wall or the pump. <br />Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer Blomstrom noted that oftentimes there is a cost <br />sharing arrangement because the City and people not adjacent to the lake have created <br />development that has increased runoff to the lake thus increasing the water level of the lake. The <br />District could pose the argument that is a contributing factor so the City should pay a share of the <br />cost. <br />Councilmember McClung felt the majority of the cost should be born by the members of the <br />District. <br />Mayor Grant asked if the control panel was bad enough to need replacement. <br />Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer Blomstrom responded that the newer modern <br />pumps need new controls and the wire from the cabinet to the pump needs to be replaced. The <br />shell of the cabinet is beat up but doesn't necessarily need to be replaced. Replacing the controls <br />would be done when the new pump is installed. He estimated the pump could be up and running <br />for a year before the retaining wall would need to be replaced. If there were another place to put <br />the float in and they removed the pump and retaining wall, slope stabilization would need to be <br />installed. <br />Councilmember Holden noted that Council agreed the Karth Lake Improvement District should <br />be asked if someone would give the City an easement to put the pump in and out of the lake. <br />Councilmember Holmes felt that a 50/50 split on cost would be more equitable because of the <br />runoff going into the lake. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.