|
<br /> fVeAJ.J Or{JrJfUfJ KJUlfOT/fj
<br /> Wed - 7/0/1Z
<br /> - -
<br /> . Tough negotiator .,~,....,-..,."... '
<br /> Arden Hills man calls foul; says city 'destroyed' his driveway
<br /> />y Mark Engebretson accusing the city's consulting confrontation with.. Podlasek.>
<br /> , Wbo says you can't fight city engineer of shortchanging bim on Nevertheless, Graham could not
<br /> ball? the quality of that project. hide his frustration over the matter,
<br /> . Though he basn't won anything But before adjourning for the
<br /> yet, longtime , Arden Hills resident POD LASEK CLAIMS the evening, the council directed
<br /> Francis Podlasek is finding gruff engineer lowered the elevation of Graham to get an estimate for the
<br /> talk and persistent lobbying can the road in front of his house by up job of regrading the entire length of
<br /> sometimes make a difference with to two feet, making for a steep Podlasek's dIiveway, about 98 feet. I
<br /> ,
<br /> city council members. incline from the street up his
<br /> Last year Podlasek, and others, driveway. Podlasek said the dirt GRAHAM HAS maintained
<br /> almost convinced the city council from the two'foot cut was used as that the elevation was lowered only
<br /> to withdraw its proposal to fill in other areas of the 'Project and six inches and was necessary to
<br /> reconstruct the road in front of his was done to lower overall project provide a uniform street grade and
<br /> house. In fact, the council pulled its costs. to match topography on both sides
<br /> plans for the North Snelling The issue was discussed at the of the road.
<br /> Avenue project, but later reversed June 29 city council meeting, and "That's a lie Mark," Podlasek
<br /> itself. Podlasek and Qthers on the during the meeting Podlasek got said after Graham 'restatedthat at
<br /> street paid a pretty penny when it hot, as he accused the engineer of the meeting.
<br /> came time to fnnd their portion of lying. Mark Graham, the. engineer,
<br /> the project - about $3,500 each. defended himself to the council, Driveway,.. .
<br /> Now Podlasek is back and he's while carefully avoiding a direct continued on page 9A
<br /> ~ ,1\
<br /> -.. .....lDrivewayICity may regrade-
<br /> . continued from page 3A making the driveway level, as it
<br /> . Graham said despite his was before the road reconstruction. .
<br /> disagreement with Podlasek, he He estimated the dirt moving to .
<br /> proposed last fall to regrade the cost between $2,000 and $3,000.
<br /> fltst 40 feet of Podlasek'sdriveway Podlasek said he will pay,for the .
<br /> anyway. Podlasek agreed, but later concrete and any additional base
<br /> I refused, Graham says. i needed. '
<br /> . "W~'ve tried.t? effectively work "I'~ n~t,trying to rob anybody,"
<br /> With him ~nd It s com.e to this," . h~ ~~Id. I m only trying to be
<br /> Graham SaId at the meeting, t farr. .
<br /> "Why does this man have the ...i I
<br /> right to destroy my driveway,"': A~ER A BRIEF discussion I
<br /> countered Podlasek, who came In which some council members
<br /> arm~d with before and after photos symp.athized with the problems
<br /> of hIS driveway. associated with a steep driveway
<br /> . ". Council Member ,D~le Hick~
<br /> . PODLASEK SAYS he changed ?Joved. to direct Graham to get the
<br /> hiS mmd for. two reasons: one, he Job es~e. The council approved
<br /> wants to IDstall a concrete the. motion 4-0. Council Member
<br /> driveway instead of bituminous; Tom Mahowald wasabsenl.,
<br /> and two,.he wants the entire length _-, __:rhe issue likely will be back at
<br /> of the driveway to be level. "Why th~ J~I~ 13 meeting, when the'
<br /> do I have to accept less than what I .' council likely will vote ou whether
<br /> ~ had?" ~e aske~ rhetorically about to pay for the regrading.
<br /> the mchne, saymg he didn't want a
<br /> "twoopitched driveway."
<br /> , Podlasek said he only wants the
<br /> city to pay for "moving dirt" and
<br /> CC" Packer
<br /> 7//0/Q,Z
<br />
|