My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_6930
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
06xxx
>
6900
>
res_6930
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:12:45 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 12:02:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
6930
Resolution Title
Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-79-20 Under and Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429
Resolution Date Passed
3/10/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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 />5 <br /> <br />job. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN CURLEY: But you say they put the cul-de-sac - <br /> <br />MR. WIDERSKI: I'm into the cul-de-sac. If their idea <br />is (inaudible) I don't know why they changed that, but if I'm <br />in that cul-de-sac, I'm entitled to connect to that sewer and <br />water. I wanted to put up a new home. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN FRANKE: To sell or for yourself? <br /> <br />MR. WIDERSKI: For myself. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: Is his current house on Parcell or 2? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: It's in the middle. <br /> <br />MR. STRONG: Here's the lot line here. <br /> <br />MR. WIDERSKI: I'm going to withdraw that. I'm not going <br />to split the lot. I'd have to give 30 feet all the way plus <br />all that footage inside there plus the cost it would run me. I <br />couldn't afford that. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: I guess I don't find the breakdown. <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: Assuming there was a cul-de-sac built, as <br />came out of the Planning Commission and out of the request, and- <br />the Council, Lot 20, which has already had a partial assessment <br />for street - but only partial because only part was affected - <br />would end up being assessed approximately $1,158. That's for <br />Lot 20 and the only cost for that is because that lot has only <br />been half assessed for street. It's a combined lot and only <br />half got assessed in the past. Lot 23 <br /> <br />MR. WIDERSKI: Are you giving her the complete total on the <br />cost for sewer, water - <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: Yes, the total cost. Lot 23, 22 and 21 <br />combined would be approximately $5,644, and that's roughly <br />$1400 for the pavement, $2600 for the sanitary sewer, one <br />sewer service, about $900 for the water and one water service. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: And there's nothing on that, and that's an <br />unbuildable lot. <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: Lot lO,which is the northeast corner, would <br />pay $23 for paving (inaudible) corner lot and pays for one <br />assessable foot; approximately $2000 for the sanitary sewer, and <br />$400 for a service. That's a total cost of approximately $2500. <br />The Widerski property total - not in segments - for the cul-de-sac <br />would be $24,623 for paving, $5,500 for sanitary sewer since <br />it was originally proposed to be split it had ,two services, so <br />approximately $800. $3,09l for water and about $580 for two <br />water services. That's the figure he's speaking of for him of <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.