My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_1977_0509
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
197x
>
1977
>
CC_Minutes_1977_0509
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 8:57:17 AM
Creation date
2/1/2005 2:47:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
5/9/1977
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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 />not proposed, 2t this time, to have an outlet - somewhat different <br />in nature than usual. ~ut the reason is it drains a relatively <br />~mall area and the 6 foot are~ beyond the little flat walk-way <br />i~ capable of carrying a 100 year storm. That i~ the amount of <br />water that would fall in a hundred year period is capable of <br />being ponded for a short time in that area. In the event we would <br />get that unfort.unate situation where you ~.."ould have not only a <br />hundred year st~rm, but it would rain the next day as well, which <br />seems to be my luck lately 1/ the water would g':> over the edge if <br />it, but would lay in the low area that would be left along the <br />park which would not cause any damage to any of the adjacent <br />properties because there is a considerable difference in elevation <br />between all these parcels including their basement in where the <br />water would be sitting here and if it came out and went in that <br />location. <br /> <br />To indicate what it might cost if an outfall or outlet is <br />ever needed, we did go into two ~lternatives. The first would be <br />to build a 12 inch pipe out across OWaS80 and down to the lake. <br />Unfortunately that1s going through a 50 foot hill which means that <br />cannot be open cut or we would have houses falling into the open <br />cut, so that would have to be a tunnel job which i~ very expen- <br />sive. The eatimate for that 12 inch pipe to the lake is $186,000 <br />additional cost. This is one of the reasons we didn't get too <br />excited about the idea of building an outlet for something we <br />didn't think we'd need. <br /> <br />A second alternative would be to put a storm sewer pump into <br />this location, pumping the water up during high rain-fall to the <br />top ,.,f the hill where it would run by gravity down. Even this <br />ren $70,000 to $80,000 in cost. The calculations indicate that <br />it would not be necessary for this outfall at all by putting a <br />proper design on it and having a seal. plus the fact that as it <br />does go up in the area it will percolate in the 2rea without <br />causing any trouble. It's our recommendation that there not be <br />any outfall. If is ~hould prove that is needed or desired, it <br />could be done at that time, but we do not propose to expend that <br />money without \~he need being well demonstrated and shown. That <br />concludes the review. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: I would like to call on the fiscal agent, <br />Mr. popovich. <br /> <br />-5- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.