CC 06-29-1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Arden Hills Council 5 June 29, 1992 Has Arden Hills considered a storm water utility such as other cities have adopted? Councilmember Malone stated that Council is in the process of considering a storm water utility, but such a program may not address this type of situation. Warren McGuire, 1553 Arden place: We were told when we purchased our property that the existing pipe drained. We have done some landscaping to our property and hauled in some fill which has actually improved the drainage problems being experienced by at the Noyed property at 3505 Ridgewood Road. (Dale Noyed nodded in agreement.) Brad Lis, 1548 Arden Place: If the direct route option is used, I suggest some additional work such as culvert replacement. Councilmember Malone asked Graham if placement of the plpe in the direct route option could be shifted somewhat. Engineer Graham said that bends in the pipe create problems, but minor realignment could be studied. Councilmember Growe asked if tree loss could be avoided if the placement were shifted. Graham said he would check, but reminded Council that an existing power pole and the limited construction path must also be considered. Councilmember Malone commented that it is clear the improvement needs to be done, however, questions relative to easements using either option must be answered prior to a decision. MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to: 1) Direct the City Attorney to determine easement acquisition costs involved in addressing Arden Place drainage problems using both of the options outlined by the City Engineer; 2) Report findings to Council for consideration at the July 20, 1992 Council worksession; 3) Continue the Arden place Improvement public hearing at the July 27, 1992 Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Councilmember Malone advised the public that Council's July 20 worksession is an open meeting. Council recessed briefly and reconvened.