My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCMin_68Oct17_Special
FalconHeights
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
196x
>
1968
>
CCMin_68Oct17_Special
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 9:06:38 AM
Creation date
6/22/2009 9:37:01 AM
Metadata
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).
View images
View plain text
2 799 <br />unscrew the coupling .- the threads in the pipe were in good <br />shape. A little bit rusty on the inside. I contend that <br />if this pipe were left alone in the first place we would still <br />have all the water we wanted. Everything was satisfactory <br />until they started $ampering with it and cutting in a 6" pipe <br />and Roseville connections, We had good service. The pipe was <br />paid for by the property owners as a private line and I can't <br />see where anybody got permission to tap onto it, <br />Warkentien: That is what we told. you people the last time.. <br />Tonkin: I can't see where we are going to derive any benefit. All <br />Roseville wants to do is to get a larger line so they can run <br />a line further out. Why should we be penalized for service that <br />is going to benefit someone else? <br />Lemberg: As far as running it further out, water is all in. This line will <br />not benefit anybody further north - it is looped around Roselawn, <br />Hamline. This will not benefit that property whatsoever.. The only <br />reason we tied it in - we wanted to help the people south of Garden <br />get better pressure. <br />Citizen: That didn't help it. <br />Radefeldt: When you went through the school property, were they assessed there? <br />Answer was yes, it was 100 assessment. <br />Pipkorn: I can't see where we will benefit by pt~.tting in a new line. Is it <br />just to prevent possibility of this line breaking or deteroriating? <br />Answer was yes, partly, and Warkentien said that Roseville will put in their <br />own anyway, even if people don't want to go along with them. <br />Pipkorn: If youlook at the east side of Hamline = how many homes are there? I <br />suppose one day they will build apt. buildings where the pit is. <br />Ernie Toroc -Bisanz Brothers Realty: To answer this question, May I say <br />I sold those properties and some of the owners are here now that <br />bought the lots and I assure you that there will be no apartment <br />building going up. <br />Lemberg: One other thing there is a shortage of hydrants between Larpenteur <br />and Garden at the present time. Corners of Garden and Hamline and <br />also Larpenteur and Hamline not covered for fire protection. Fire <br />Underwriters have asked for maximum of 300 feet between. That is an <br />added protection. <br />Black: In your opinion, Brad, if this present line goes out in the next few <br />years, it would cost double to replace? <br />Lemberg: If Roseville puts it in alone then they would be the only ones to pay <br />for it. Lines have been known to last 50 years and others only last <br />10 years, I can't say. <br />Warkentien said that Falcon Heights cannot connect to the line if Roseville <br />puts it in because they have bulk water from St, Paul and St, Paul <br />would not allow it. He reviewed action of St. Paul Water Department <br />when Village asked to connect to Roseville water from Snelling and <br />Roselawn Avenues. <br />Radefeldt: Why do these few people have to pay for that line? How about the <br />storm sewer - we had to pay to drain other people's water. <br />Warkentien: Water is assessed by the front foot and storm sewer assessments <br />are on a square footage of your lot. Sidewalk, curb and gutter, <br />water are assessed on a front foot basis. <br />Pipkorn: It seems that people here are $ery much against it. If anyone else <br />is of that opinion let them speak up. I can't see why we should <br />bear the load of a line we already paid for in the first place and <br />then pay for enlarging it just so as to tie in with the laws of today. <br />For years we lived without any fires and never had to be benefited <br />by insurance. They charge us just as much now. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.