My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_7079
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
07xxx
>
7000
>
res_7079
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:13:41 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 12:05:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
7079
Resolution Title
Receiving Report and Providing for Public Hearing on Improvement No. ST-80-22
Resolution Date Passed
11/20/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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 />3 <br /> <br />Secondly, the area shown near the Lydia/Snelling location, <br />generally called Area D, now has at the other end of this pipe <br />that crosses Snelling, ponding area near Snelling and also the <br />Northwestern College to provide ponding to service this area. <br />That's also new and was completed this summer. <br /> <br />The second reason for reviewing this storm drain is because <br />petitions have been received by the City and are also pending for <br />streets within this boundary area. It is the staff's position, <br />and I would say generally well held and (inaudible)with other <br />engineers, that you do not put streets in and come along three <br />years later, tear the streets up and put a storm drain in. Not <br />only is it totally destructive to the street and a waste of funds, <br />but also by building streets without having proper drainage the <br />streets simply will not hold up at (inaudible). The drains are <br />to carry the water away from the street rather than have them set <br />along the edge of streets or ditches and inundate the ground under <br />the pavement, so the City has received petitions. As a result of <br />that it's necessary to look at providing the storm drains for <br />those areas, and those petitions crossed and include most of the <br />boundaries. They would include A, B, D, pieces of A again, and C, <br />so through one petition or another nearly a whole area is affected. <br />Therefore, we looked at the whole area for storm drainage. <br /> <br />Lastly, and I guess I would say not leastly, we continue to get <br />complaints from some of the parcels in the area that they're <br />simply not having adequate drainage. Of particular concern is the <br />swale and ditch way off the end of the Brenner cul-de-sac which <br />every year causes flooding in the cul-de-sac, and I would say <br />without proper drainage facilities that's something we cannot <br />control. There's also standing water in these areas and standing <br />water in most of the quadrants of the intersections in the area <br />because they are somewhat lower and have no facilities to carry <br />them out. The roadways are constructed in a normal manner with a <br />crown in the middle and when you have a crown this way and that, <br />until the water builds up enough to get over the crown you have <br />standing water. <br /> <br />That is sort of a brief breakdown as to why we are now <br />looking at these facilities. There are various locations throughout <br />here that we feel should have storm drainage facilitiesprovided <br />as well as to maintain, as best we can, the roadway system. <br /> <br />In a few minutes Mr. Popovich will be talking to you about <br />the cost involved as well as assessments. I'd jU3tlike to at <br />least have you keep in mind that the costs he's going to be <br />discussing assume that there are no roadways to be done at the <br />same time the storm is being done. We have to make assessments <br />for the particular improvement. We cannot assume some street will <br />be paved or some other street will be paved. We have to make <br />estimates for what it would cost to put the storm drains in <br />and then repave the street behind us (inaudible). .temporary <br />pavement but it still costs mmney. Simply reconstructing Lydia back <br />to its current status is approximately $8'6,000 if done with the <br />storm work. Also the other petitions, if they were done at the <br />same time the storm work were done would be another $70,000 that <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.