My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCMin_69Mar6_Public_Hearing
FalconHeights
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
196x
>
1969
>
CCMin_69Mar6_Public_Hearing
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 9:13:13 AM
Creation date
6/22/2009 9:51:59 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
2855 <br />Mr. McCleery: This is a very small water shed. Why so many outlets and <br />sewers to drain this little area? <br />Engineer Lemberg: Roseville is bringing in 1~2" to 1511 pipes. We are only proposing <br />a main of 1211 for Autumn. If we agree to go in with them, they <br />must increase their pipes one size. If we don't they can't <br />handle us later. They are paying for their own; if we don't go, <br />we won't be included for future use. <br />Mr. McCleery: Would the small water shed be able to be handled by the minimum? <br />Engineer Lemberg: It depends on how fast your water is draining. <br />Mr. McCleery: As far as me as a property owner, my land is high and I have not <br />and don't expect to have floods. I don't mind paying a small <br />portion but not the full assessment. <br />Engineer Lemberg: Once every 1~0 years we could have a storm to back up water <br />to stop drainage in Roseville's pipes. However, in the last <br />five years, we have had five such storms. <br />Ecklund: I think we must make it clear that the ~1Ja,,000 is to pay for our <br />share in the Roseville area, anything above we would have to <br />contract as a Village. If we only talk about storm sewers along <br />Roselawn, we are talking about something less than the $15,500. <br />Engineer Lemberg: Adding lots would not necessarily cut the cost because Roseville <br />would still charge $350 per lot. <br />Mr. Stowe It is my understanding that this is a potential problem only <br />1951 Autumn: once every 1~0 years. Plus the fact that the storm sewer on <br />Roselawn is really a preliminary to being a 1~8 foot highway <br />to serve the Rosedale Shopping Area. This seems to be a first <br />step and this is where we should stop it. This, in my viewpoint, <br />would be a depreciatioon in property along this area. <br />I commend the Council for looking after the interests of the <br />owners and for getting the price in soaaesvhat more reasonable Line. <br />We really need a lot more time to see dust what is involved i.n <br />the upgrading of Roselawn Avenue. I would like to suggest that we <br />look into individual costs of sewer lines. All of us have a lot <br />of things we would 1i.ke to spend $600 on and i.f we are being asked <br />to spend it on something like this, we should have ample time to <br />look into it. <br />Engineer Lemberg: As a matter of information, the County has a schedule of upgrading <br />for the whole County. We have known about this since 1960. Roselawa <br />Avenue has been on this schedule since Highway 280 was built. We <br />still don't know when it is going to be done. It was on the <br />schedule long before the Rosedale Center was decided to be put in. <br />We know about the major thoroughfare planned by the Metropolitan <br />Planning Commission, but we don't know where it will be located. <br />There has been a considerable amount of st~edy and I have met with <br />these people on behalf of Falcon Heights. All this has been <br />discussed. The State and County have hired a Traffic Engineer <br />from Chicago and they are preparing a study on where this North-South <br />Route should go. They are supposed to be uabiased because they <br />are from out of town. It is something we know is going to happen. <br />The County is not pushing us to improve Roselawn Avenue. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.