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 />8 <br /> <br />to pay a full assessment. <br /> <br />As far as the water standing over there in front of 621 <br />sohool district, there's water that stands there a while, but <br />it takes one heck of a rain and it doesn't take much for it to <br />dissipate. So I'm in opposition where I'll be paying this and <br />get no benefit. I'm against it. <br /> <br />MR. PETER SCHIFSKY, 3082 North Hamline: I guess what I <br />have to say is that when it rains we have one of the most efficient <br />storm sewers there - the upper green line running into Josephine <br />and several times I wish I could find some of the oil that came <br />off the street and went into the lake. I do admire the improved <br />storm sewer system on Clarmar, but would like to know what we <br />would have to do in order to induce some cooperation between <br />the city and county to get a holding pond so we don't leave Lake <br />Josephine as a holding pond. <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: As far as inducing (inaudible) we would like <br />to hope the county would cooperate. There's nothing I know of <br />we can do to force them. It would be the same with the necessary <br />easement near the lake. The facility we would hope to put there - <br />we would hope the people who own the property would recognize the <br />value this would have on the lake and would cooperate, but other <br />than desiring it and trying to talk to them and work out some <br />solution, we didn't feel it correct that we would mandate it. <br /> <br />MR. SCHIFSKY: You have our total cooperation, I think, in <br />that aspect. We're swimming in oil at times so who would I <br />address at the county level to have something done? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: If this improvement were carried out we would <br />be going to the county's engineering department to see if they would <br />give us a permit to do work on their facility. Hopefully it <br />wouldn't be necessary to go to the County Board. <br /> <br />MR. RONALD BARTZ, 1499 Clarmar: I also am like the man <br />from Area F. I would derive no benefit, but I'm not in opposi- <br />tion. <br /> <br />For clarification on the money - Mr. Popovich mentioned a <br />figure. Is he talking about A, B, C all in one group? Then why <br />is it designated as one area? I would assume you're assuming one <br />part may not be done. A may be done, not C. Is it a whole new <br />picture? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: We simply label them that way to be able to <br />internally identify where water came from. In other words, which <br />lots, how much water we would expect to go to certain pipes, <br />where catch basins would be needed. We did that so we could size <br />each individual pipe properly and we were assuming this would <br />be an area storm drain. <br /> <br />MR. BARTZ: So it will be a project or not - not a half a <br />project. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.