CC 09-10-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 13 Councilmember Larson stated that this pond was estimated to cost $300,000. He asked what size pond that would cover. Mr. Leaf noted Appendix D indicates the approximate size of the pond. He added the surface area of the pond would be 2.46 acres for pond. Councilmember Rem noted the language about this pond, conflicts with statements made in the document regarding the importance of city parks. Mayor Probst stated he urged caution on the part of the Council to pre-judge a solution. He noted Valentine Park now has significant drainage problems. He added the fill resulting from the construction of a pond could be used to bring up the standards of the park. Councilmember Larson stated they should add language to make sure that alternatives have to be considered. Councilmember Grant stated the area of Valentine Park was three acres. He noted he would rather the plan indicate the city was looking at something other than a pond for that location. He stated he would not support a pond. Mayor Probst stated the language would need to be similar for all the locations. He noted the Council needed to keep in mind the purpose of the document. He added a pond would raise the same issues at every location. He stated that until they tried to design a solution, the city would not know what would be best. Councilmember Grant stated he was fine with the descriptors at other locations. He noted his concern that a future city council could think this Council advocated destroying a park. Mr. Leaf stated the intent of the plan was that it should be a guide. He noted it was not intended to be a hard and fast document. He added the plan needs to be moved into the agency approval stage. He stated he would view this issue as a clarifying change and not an intent change. He noted the plan would not need to go back for another agency review. He added the plan was intended and written to be flexible. Councilmember Rem stated that since some of the text refers to these ponds as projects the plan could define "p" as "project" instead of "pond". She noted the word project gives it a slightly broader implication. She added the city could look at a broader solution than a predetermined pond. Councilmember Grant stated on page 32, F2, stated Rice Creek Watershed had the authority to approve changes. He noted the Watershed could consider it a plan, Mayor Probst responded this was not a plan from the standpoint of a predetermined solution. He stated the city was not committed to spend this money. Councilmember Grant stated it would be wise to reword the plan. He noted right now a pond was costed and sized.