Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> , <br /> . Arden Hills council 3 June 8, 1992 <br /> The following comments, questions and responses were heard: <br /> Resident Kurt Lawrence, 4516 Keithson Drive: Why is the <br /> city involved in doing this project? Would the City be <br /> liable in a flood situation? Why are Keithson Drive <br /> residents the only people being assessed? Why are nearby <br /> townhomes not assessed? I am angry about the assessment and <br /> feel it is illegal because the City knew of the problem for <br /> some time but allowed continued development to worsen the <br /> situation. <br /> City Attorney Filla: It ~s incumbent upon the City to <br /> provide proper drainage. Assessments are proposed for <br /> properties which contribute to the drainage problem. <br /> Engineer Graham: The assessments proposed have been <br /> determined justifiable by an independent appraiser. <br /> Resident John Lawyer, 4539 Keithson Drive: There are <br /> parcels on the west, south and east that also contribute to <br /> the drainage problem. Why will they not be assessed? I <br /> have submitted a letter of objection. Are objections being <br /> . considered by the Council? <br /> Attorney Filla: Objections are being considered. <br /> Engineer Graham: Research of topography reveals that nearby <br /> townhomes do not contribute to the dra;nage problem. when <br /> the Reiling property is developed, an overall drainage plan <br /> will be necessary as part of that development. <br /> Resident Kurt Lawrence: I disagree with Graham regarding <br /> drainage from the townhomes - the townhomes' drainage does <br /> flow into the pond. <br /> Property owner George Reiling, 661 Heinel Drive, Roseville: <br /> Quit e a bit of the townhome property drains to the pond. I <br /> have three photos taken at three different times that <br /> indicate drainage problems existed a long time ago. Quite a <br /> whil e ago, I offered my property to contain water, but the <br /> City chose to pump water into the storm sewer instead. The <br /> City Attorney has stated that the city can't look to the <br /> developer to be responsible, yet that developer is still in <br /> business and is not being pursued. Rice Creek Watershed <br /> District (RCWD) should also be held responsible. Both RCWD <br /> and the developer were negligent and should share costs. <br /> . Resident Toni Tredal, 4521 Keithson Drive: I agree with Mr. <br /> Reiling. This is not an "improvement" because residents <br /> have the right to expect proper drainage. The City says <br /> there is no recourse, but the City has not acted in a timely <br /> manner in this situation. <br />