Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />MAY 12, 2003 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated he could not find any justification for the City to <br />offer money for this easement. He noted he did not believe the City should pay for <br />an easement when the City was trying to improve the quality of Lake Josephine <br />that in turn benefited the residents of the association. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated he did not believe the dollar amount the association <br />was proposing was fair and equitable. <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski stated she was not in favor of paying for an easement. She <br />stated the City was doing a lot for the benefit of the association, rather than taking <br />away a benefit. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Doug Hartford, 1292 Ingerson, stated he is a member of the Association Task <br />Force. He noted the City approached the association with this proposal and it was <br />not the association that approached the City. He indicated as far as the benefits, if <br />the City was not doing the project, there would be no need for a bridge. He stated <br />the association has not requested for a bridge. He further stated if this project <br />were approved, the Association would lose some of its land. He expressed <br />concern that the City was tying this easement in with the road assessments. He <br />indicated he did not believe it was appropriate for the City to not pay for an <br />easement on their land. He indicated they would like to see the issue resolved in a <br />timely fashion. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated it was not important who proposed what and <br />when, but what was important was the improvement to this property and the water <br />quality. He noted it was a choice between whether or not the association wanted <br />the improvement that the City was willing to pay for, or they go forward with a <br />grit chamber. <br /> <br />Doug Hartford replied it was their understanding that the assocIatIOn was <br />responsible for the maintenance once the bridge was installed and the excavation <br />of the channel was a one-time excavation. He stated it was the association's <br />position that they wanted this be "put to rest" one way or another. He indicated he <br />did not know how the association would vote for this proposal, but the Task Force <br />wanted to be in a position to be able to argue correctly. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson asked if it was the City's responsibility to maintain the <br />area after improvements were made. <br />