My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_1970_0305
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
197x
>
1970
>
CC_Minutes_1970_0305
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 8:52:50 AM
Creation date
2/1/2005 12:08:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
3/5/1970
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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 />MR. JOSEPH REGNIER, 990 W. Shryer Avenue: Asked what the <br />exact location of the storm sewer would be relative to his property. <br /> <br />MRS. VICTOR ANDRES, 901 Parker Avenue: Said they have no <br />drainage problem and with all the people on Parker Avenue who had <br />signed a petition opposing the construction of the improvement, <br />asked if the Council would just forget Parker Avenue and start <br />the improvement on the next street. <br /> <br />MR. RICHARD BEHR~ 960 Burke: OWns property at 965 Parker. <br />The village will not allow him to build on the property because if <br />he fills it in it will push the water on his neighbor's yard. In <br />favor of the improvement. <br /> <br />MR. RICHARD KOWARSCH, 1015 Parker: Asked about the location <br />of catch basins. Further asked if this improvement would drain <br />the sloughs. <br /> <br />MR. JAMES H. CASEY, 1965 N. Victoria: His question concerned <br />the area of the improvement where it borders Victoria along the <br />angle of Victoria and going north. There is a swamp on both sides <br />of the street and he wanted to know why that was included in the <br />drainage area since it creates no problem for anybody. He felt <br />it was not desirable to drain all the swamps and because the <br />property belongs to Roselawn Cemetery and they can't be assessed <br />or taxed for the improvenLent, that portion should be excluded. <br /> <br />MR. HOWARD REILAND, 1056 Parker Avenue: All of the lots on <br />Parker are 85 x 468 which is very close to an acre of land. Would <br />they be assessed on the acreage basis or the front foot basis. <br /> <br />MR. ERNEST OBERG, 978 Parker (Spoke before): <br />the assessments for an individual lot as oppossed <br />assessments and who determined whether or not one <br />split into two lots. <br /> <br />Inquired about <br />to acreage <br />lot could be <br /> <br />MR. AL DENZINE, 8~7 Parker Avenue: Said he has already paid <br />$200 on storm sewer and doesn't feel he should have to pay an <br />additional $250. <br /> <br />MR. HOWARD HOCHULA, 1024 Parker: Asked if filters would be <br />needed in the storm sewer system. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.