My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_7073
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
07xxx
>
7000
>
res_7073
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:13:37 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 12:05:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
7073
Resolution Title
Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. ST-P-80-21 Under and Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429
Resolution Date Passed
11/17/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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 />7 <br /> <br />MR. SCOTT: But this petition is legal by state law? <br />MAYOR DEMOS: Yes. <br /> <br />MR. SCOTT: I have just learned there was a drainage easement <br />about half way up the block. <br /> <br />MR. FOX: That used to go between my house (inaudible) that's <br />on my lot. <br /> <br />MR. SCOTT: I wonder if this easement has been enforced and <br />if part of the reason for asking for the storm sewer is to <br />alleviate any more pressure on enforcing the drainage easement. <br /> <br />MR. FOX: That has nothing to do with it. <br /> <br />MR. CLIFFORD LUND, 2241 North Milton: I am here representing <br />Roberts Properties who own two apartments on Pascal, and we're <br />for the improvement even though we have no particular problem with <br />the road or storm sewer. <br /> <br />MR. HAROLD ROSS, 1456 West Burke: I have only been a resident <br />for a little over two years. It's quite obvious to me, looking at <br />the street, that this street was built by a builder. It was not <br />built to hold a school bus or mail truck. It was just built <br />temporarily to serve a purpose and that was served a long time ago <br />and I think we need a new road. <br /> <br />MR. RICHARD SEITER, 1407 West Burke: I am definitely in favor <br />of a new street. <br /> <br />MR. HERBERT KRIEGLER, 1386 West County Road B: I oppose <br />including County Road B in the storm sewer project because I <br />believe if a thorough study was made it would show that very little <br />of our water goes down into the Pascal/Burke area. In the spring <br />in my yard and my neighbor's we have a puddle in our yard and it <br />sits there until it soaks in or evaporates and due to all the <br />bushes, shrubs, there's no way our water can drain down that far. <br /> <br />~~. DONALE MillJDAHL, 1420 West Burke: I am definitely in favor <br />of the assessment and I feel it's a little unfortunate that we're <br />getting the water problem thrown in with the assessment. That <br />wasn't part of the petition and we don't want that to spoil our <br />proposed project. <br /> <br />MRS. B.H.G. BRADY, l415 West Burke: I am in favor of the <br />resurfacing of our road. I am a recent transplant to Roseville from <br />Minneapolis. Twelve years ago I went through this same thing in <br />Minneapolis. It was said earlier this evening that paving of the <br />streets putting in curb and so forth does not do anything for the <br />property. I know differently. It not only adds to the aesthetic <br />beauty but the convenience, and the property sells a lot easier. <br />I am definitely in favor of re-doing our street to get rid of the <br />patches upon patches upon patches, and am in sympathy with the people <br />on County Road B, but that's one of the facts of life. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.