My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 06-08-1992
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
CCP 06-08-1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:09:04 PM
Creation date
11/6/2006 2:39:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
121
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
<br /> . Arden Hills Council 3 ~<ay 25, ~992 <br /> ARDEN PLACE DRAINAGt;, <br /> Mayor Sather arrived at '7, :::1: p.1'n. <br /> I . JJ <br /> Engineer Gl"ahara provided background on this lssue. ,-{;:;;' <br /> reported that a public hearing was held in October, 1991 whet,_ <br /> plans were presented to extend a 12" pipe Irom the " <br /> ,Lc;:'c:tL u'- <br /> 1553 Arden Place to the south toward Lake Johanna to correct <br /> drainage problems in the Arden Place area. Graham stated that <br /> further review of the situation was then delayed due to the <br /> extreme snowfall which began the end of October, 1991. <br /> Referring to his May 18, 1992 report, Gr-aham explained the <br /> pr-oposed layout of two drainage options and compared them as <br /> follows: <br /> Option 1 would be the most direct r-oute, however it would <br /> require extensive removal of existing trees, would <br /> present construction difficulties, and would require <br /> easement acquisition. The cost of Option .L would be <br /> about $17,000 plus easement acquisition. <br /> . Option 2 would be more favorable In that construction <br /> would take place in City owned right-of-way and would <br /> minimally affect existing trees. The cost of Option ~ <br /> " <br /> would be about $24,000. <br /> ~ ' recommended Option 2 and advised that Option 1 has <br /> \Jranam <br /> received some opposition from affected t'esidents. He added <br /> that either- option would provide an adequate solution to the <br /> drainage problem. <br /> - Councilmember Gr-owe asked to compar-e Option 1 and Option 2 <br /> relative to impact on existing trees. Graham said Option 1 <br /> would r-equire the removal of possible 15 - 18 treesl while he <br /> would hope that Option 2 could avoid any tr-ee removal. <br /> Councilmember Hicks inquired as to why the drainage and <br /> easement problem was not addressed when the house at 1553 was <br /> buil t . Graham stated there was a drainage pipe in place at <br /> that time and the placement of that pipe has not changed, but <br /> the pipe has been pi ugged for some time, therefore ineffective <br /> as a dr-ainage system. <br /> Wally Bauer, 1553 Ar-den Place, stated that when he bought his <br /> lot, he assumed the existing drainage pipe was adequate, then <br /> the city issued a building per-mit, the house was built, the <br /> . drainage pr-oblem was identified, and the City has tried to no <br /> avail to unplug the existing pipe. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.