My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_7360
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
07xxx
>
7300
>
res_7360
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:16:15 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 12:12:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
7360
Resolution Title
Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. UL-81-25 Under and Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 and Ordering Preparation of Plans and Specifications Therefor
Resolution Date Passed
6/14/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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 />here for street lights that are placed here. We have divided the <br />area into blocks of lots - eight to ten parcels for each poten- <br />tial street light. In this case there are eight lots, three of <br />which have existing structures on them and the other five are <br />vacant. The petition for this project came from the three <br />people living in the area and an owner of one vacant lot also <br />signed the petition. <br /> <br />The procedure would be to have Northern States Power put <br />the light up and then have them maintain it over the life of the <br />improvement. The City would pay the bills for the facility and <br />nearly 80% would come from general fund operations, the same as <br />other street lights, the difference being the added cost that <br />NSP charges the City because it is underground. We spread this <br />over a 20 year period to come up with the cost. There's really <br />not much more to say from a construction standpoint. It would <br />be constructed this year if approved. <br /> <br />MR. POPOVICH: The total cost of this improvement is <br />$1,858.20. It was 50% petitioned - four out of the eight lots <br />that you see in the area. When you divide the $1,858.20 by <br />eight lots, it comes out to $232.28 per lot. Obviously, when <br />Mr. Honchell said it would go over a 20 year period - I prefer <br />not to spread it over that long of a period. When you have <br />$232.28 and spread it over a 20 year period, your costs of ad- <br />ministration and so forth would add so much to that that it's <br />just not practical. In my opinion, I think the Council should <br />try to determine this evening whether the public would take it <br />in a one year assessment. My recommendation is to not spread <br />it over more than a five year pe~iod. You would then have <br />$232.28 divided by five, with a carrying charge not to exceed <br />13%, with the right of prepayment at any time. If we could <br />take care of this in one year, then it would not have to be <br />included in a bond issue. It would be helpful if the people <br />would go along with this approach. <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: I agree with Mr. Popovich that the assess- <br />ment should not be spread over 20 years. The cost of this <br />improvement was based on a 20 year period, which means we <br />would not have to come back in three or four years and do it <br />allover again. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: Are there any written statements? <br /> <br />MR. ANDRE: There are none. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: I will open the hearing for the Avon street <br />light. <br /> <br />MR. RICHARD SANDBERG, 3087 Avon Street: I have a ques- <br />tion for Mr. Honchell. Are there any options that the City <br />offers in way of a more ornamental street light thap that <br />offered by NSP? <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.