Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Extract of Minutes of Meeting <br />of City Council <br />City of Roseville <br />Ramsey County, Minnesota <br /> <br />February 8, 1982 <br /> <br />Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting <br /> <br />of the City Council of the City of Roseville, Minnesota, was <br /> <br />held in the City Hall in said City on Monday, February 8, 1982, <br /> <br />at 7:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> <br />The following members were present: Mayor Demos and <br /> <br />Councilmen Curley, Kehr, Franke and Johnson; and the following <br /> <br />were absent: None. <br /> <br />Also present were James F. Andre, City Manager; Roger <br /> <br />Jensen of Peterson, Bell & Converse, City Attorneys; Charles V. <br /> <br />Honchell, City Public Works Director; and Peter S. Popovich of <br /> <br />Peterson, Popovich, Knutson & Flynn, City Bond Consultants. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: The next hearing is for Improvement No. <br />SS-8l-l8, sanitary sewer service for 3056 Raymond Avenue. <br /> <br />MR. ANDRE: We have the Certificate of Mailing and Affi- <br />davit of Publication on file. <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: This particular property is located on the <br />extreme north end of Raymond Avenue, the last home. 35W would <br />be located at the top of the screen. Once again, a structure <br />that has a sewer near it but not quite to it. It's a fairly <br />old sanitary sewer. In talking to the owner at various times, <br />there appears to have been some confusion - to use a polite <br />word - I really don't know what happened back 20 some years ago <br />when this was built - but as to providing a sewer at a depth <br />everyone thought it was at. There is an existing sanitary <br />sewer that comes to this point and, as you can see, in yellow, <br />it stops in front of the neighbor. I don't know why it stopped <br />in front of the neighbor, but it did. The proposal would be <br />to bring, again, just a service, not a mainline, from that man- <br />hole, through the edge of the cul-de-sac, to a point near a <br />tree and the driveway of the parcel involved. Our survey <br />records indicate that that is low enough to serve the struc- <br />ture and it would be practically two and a half feet below the <br />lowest floor elevation so that the structure could then - so <br />