My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_6370
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
06xxx
>
6300
>
res_6370
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:09:47 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 11:49:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
6370
Resolution Title
Ordering the construction of Improvement No. ST-76-7A under and pursuant to Minnesota statutes, chapter 429
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.
/
5
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 />and then into one of the ponds that exist. Once again we would <br />be attempting to have this done in conjunction with the roadway <br />work whereby the elevation would be established to provide for <br />additional ponding. We want to carefully control how much water <br />goes into this and it's a small area. This work would be done <br />in conjunction with the past storm drain (inaudible) if it's <br />improved, namely, combined with storm project 76-8 to be a com- <br />bined project and would all be let under one contract and done <br />at one time. It would also be a means of getting the county1s <br />participation in the roadways. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: Mr. Popovich, will you present your summary. <br /> <br />MR. POPOVICH: The total cost of this addition, if it goes <br />ahead, is $25,440. As you know, it's a storm sewer so the same <br />things I said about storm sewer assessments and the consideration <br />for change would apply here. Obviously the most feasible thing <br />would be to merge it with the 76-8 improvement so that they both <br />can be done together in order to accomplish a combined and con- <br />solidated improvement. We would recommend this be spread over <br />20 years with the 8% carrying charge on the unpaid balance and <br />one-twentieth of the principal being paid each year. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: Do we have any letters. <br /> <br />MR. ANDRE: We have none. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: I will now open the hearing to the public. <br />Any people who wish to be heard. <br /> <br />MR. RICHARD GA~LFUS, Manager of Rentco Division of Fruehauf <br />Corporation, 2700 North Cleveland: Did you say what the cost <br />would be? <br /> <br />MR. POPOVICH: It1s that $250 per lot we talked about <br />earlier on residential, $500 on commercial and $l,600 on commer- <br />cial acreage. <br /> <br />MR. GAILFUS: We're listed as a separate lot. Is that $500 <br />a lot? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: It depends on the size. If it's what's <br />thought of as a city parcel, usually 80 to 100 to 150 feet, <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.