My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_6369
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
06xxx
>
6300
>
res_6369
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:09:47 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 11:49:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
6369
Resolution Title
Approving County Plans for Cleveland Avenue Improvement No. P-W-SS-76-9
Resolution Date Passed
5/10/1976
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />MAYOR DEMOS: Anyone else? <br /> <br />MR. JOHN NELSON, 3096 Cleveland Avenue: Di<3 I get it right <br />that this would cost - the storm sewer was about $250 to $300 a <br />year? <br /> <br />MR. POPOVICH: The $250 - or if it gets increased - is the <br />total cost you would pay over a 20 year period of time so you <br />take one-twentieth of $250 and that's how much your principal <br />would be each year plus 8% on the unpaid balance. This improve- <br />ment would be $3.00 a foot. If you have a lOO foot lot that's <br />$300. Divide that by 20 years and you can prepay it any time. <br /> <br />MR. NELSON: I think I had that wrong. I'm glad I got <br />that straight because I think you were (inaudible) we were all <br />going to pay $500 or $600 more. <br /> <br />MR. AL SERVER, 3060 Cleveland Avenue: I don't feel the <br />four lane road is a good idea because it's primarily through an <br />ind~strial area to the south (inaudible) however, north (inau- <br />dible). I believe Garrett Trucking which is the furthest type <br />of heavy industry it's all residential and I feel a four lane <br />area through this particular part of the road (inaUdible) <br />actually encourage more truck and car traffic along that route. <br />I don't feel we need it at all. <br /> <br />MR. ROBERT THOMPSON, 3037 North Cleveland: I have the same <br />feeling and this was my hesitation on the storm sewer problem <br />because I don't feel we need a 52 foot road in that area. Most <br />of us have no real concept of the actual width. The pictures <br />are pretty, but unless we can actually see what that means I <br />don't like the way Fairview is. It looks pretty and all that <br />sort of thing but this will give us more trucks. We're a resi- <br />dential area and the State of Minnesota says we cannot regulate <br />truck traffic except for double bottoms. I wish the trucking <br />companies would understand that. They're not supposed to use <br />it for double bottoms, but they still do. I wonder if this will <br />not increase the number of trucks, say three or four times down <br />th~ough a residential area, and that's what this is. At least <br />on Fairview where it was done there is some industry on one side <br />of the road. There isn't any here whatsoever and I don't think <br />this is fair to ask us as property owners to have a road that is <br />not necessary excpet for trucks. <br /> <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.