My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 08-31-1992
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
CC 08-31-1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:12:09 PM
Creation date
11/9/2006 4:32:20 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.
/
30
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 />. <br /> <br />Arden Hills Council <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />l'iUgUst :'11, <br /> <br />, 0('''; <br />,_ j ,J ,<. <br /> <br />being done to side step any liability issl1e, b~t rathH~ tt~s <br />:;:.:r:oject. \'las al ways in~€'r.ded, 'Rf?gar.-ding the issue of funding <br />the project, Filla reminded that the City at large will pay <br />the majori.ty of the project and there ar8 no nther known <br />means Pilla added that if the City did pursue the <br />developer, anytbing ~ecovered could theoretically be applied <br />to the City's portion rather than decrease individual <br />assessments. <br /> <br />Kurt LawrGnce said the developer. at one time, planned to <br />improve the pond, but the City said it was not needed. <br />Graham stated that not having been involved at that time, he <br />does not know what actually took place. Filla stated that <br />the City has never sai,d this pond or the pond outlet was not <br />needed. Councilmember Hicks added that in conversing with <br />the former City engineer. they also have no recollection of <br />discouraging the developer from improving the pond. Dick <br />Foster explained there was once a pipe from the street to <br />the old pond which was removed. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Maqel-s/T.r_.~Q~I~~p~ection ,- 4521 Keith.'3oJ.l,:~ Mark Magers s~,ated <br />that in 1989 he called the former engineer and Mayor Sather <br />tc review the concerns of the Keithson properties; several <br />meetirlgs took place, but the developer had no plan to <br />address the problems then; now the developer is no long~~ <br />involved and more time has elapsed. He said that when the <br />City Engineer released the bond, tte drainage issue was not <br />r'esolved. Fi~la comrnented 'that an outlet to the Reiling <br />property was always intended and now the City is taking <br />action to obtain the easement for the outlet through <br />condemnation proceedings. Filla added that Rice Creek <br />Watershed District approved the drainage plans assuming an <br />outlet would be added sometime in the future. <br /> <br />Toni Tredal said she has a copy of the Rice Creek Water'shed <br />District permit spelling out the conditions the developer <br />was reqllired to meet; but the developer did not complete any <br />of the conditions. She stated ~hat she is offended by <br />Counci lmember Hicks E-;,1rI ier comments becallse ,Magers/Tredal <br />have spent very mIlch time trying to deal with this matter. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~,nde:~;:;CJn Obi~_:'2J,_Jcc': - 4522 Keithson: James Anderson asked <br />why the Reiling property is not proposed to be assessed. <br />Graham stated that the Reiling property is adequate to hold <br />;ts own drainage, part of the pond is located on the Reiling <br />property, and Mr. Reiling has not granted an easement or <br />donated his property to contain drainage from other <br />properties <br /> <br />FO;3T.er _ObjS'~;j::iorL__:_4_?27 Keith2on: Dick Fost.er- commented <br />that the Reili,Ilg property drains more J,nta the pond than any <br />other property in the area. He questioned whet~er the City <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.