My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_6473
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
06xxx
>
6400
>
res_6473
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:09:58 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 11:52:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
6473
Resolution Title
Ordering the construction of Improvement No. SS-76-18 Alternate III under and pursuant to Minnesota statutes, chapter 429
Resolution Date Passed
4/4/1977
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 />The first alternative would be to concentrate solely on <br />the triangular site and extend an existing sanitary sewer, which <br />is slightly to the southwest on the west side of Old Highway 8, <br />northerly to the corner of his parcel. then go along the boundary <br />line to mid-point where services could go to this parcel and <br />extended to that parcel. This is the cheapest method as far as <br />special assessments would be concerned. It would result in some <br />rather long sanitary sewer services to lead to the other parcels. <br /> <br />The second alternative serving the same area. was in keeping <br />with the request of the owner, namely that this site be served <br />initially and only a single line be constructed and at some <br />future date - although unknown - the remaining third area would <br />be served. This does not solve the probe 1m of this lot in the <br />future. It also does not serve the two unconnected (inaudible) <br />for the future - this large commercial site. <br /> <br />A third alternative was therefore looked at, and this is the <br />most expensive because (inaudible) it would extend the same line <br />up as Alternative II, but a second line would be proposed to be <br />built along the lot line to the corner of this area to serve Lot <br />2, and it would also construct a line under Old Highway 8 that <br />would serve these two sites and potentially. at least, perhaps <br />in the future, this other large undeveloped area. This one also <br />has some services that are in the southern corner and it's un- <br />known just how that will develop, and until that development does <br />take place, it's impossible to say whether they will use this <br />line o~ whethe~ they won't. <br /> <br />The Public Works Department recommendation is that this be <br />the alternative to be followed because potentially it takes care <br />of all of the needs of the parcels. It could be done in three <br />phases - although not recolnmended - that this be built first, <br />and this the second, and this at some other time - again relatively <br />soon, however. If we follow the phasing technique. it will mean <br />additionsl administrative costs such as these hearings, assessment <br />hearings. plus the fact that inflation will be raising the cost <br />of construction, and the engineering costs will be higher per <br />unit because there will be three small projects instead of one <br />larger project. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN CURLEY: ~1hat place of business is that 3l14? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: That's a service station - a gas station. <br />and this. although it's zoned commercial. is a single family <br />residence. <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.