My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-17-81 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1980's
>
1981
>
03-17-81 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 8:42:51 PM
Creation date
10/1/2019 4:08:11 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MEETING, MARCH 17, 1981 -4- <br />-WATERLINE-EXTENSION: <br />Administrator Whittaker asked who else benefits and noted that <br />the residents on the east side of Lake Elmo Avenue own the <br />property on the west, too. <br />Earl Goerss - said that the residents are the only ones who <br />benefit, but normally there are property owners on the other <br />side of the line who would share the cost. He contends that <br />the railroad was not assessed. He also said that the property <br />on the west side of the street cannot be developed. <br />Administrator Whittaker suggested putting the waterline on <br />the back of the properties, so that it could serve future <br />development. Residents would still pay for both sides now; <br />but could recover part of their investment in the future <br />if the property were developed. <br />Mr. Goerss asked on which side of the road the waterstop <br />will be on. <br />Engineer Bohrer said it will be on the east side and that the <br />service would be augered under Lake Elmo Avenue. This would <br />avoid disruption the east side of the street. He said the <br />cost is double because there are no properties served on the <br />west side of the road. <br />Dr. Lundholm stated that the fact remains,that because residents <br />have lake frontage they are taxed extra and are penalized now <br />because there are no homes on the lake side. <br />Engineer Bohrer said this is a unique situation in that the <br />road divides the lake and the homes. <br />Mayor Eder asked the Engineer how(.ff.ar'the line can be extended <br />to the south. <br />Engineer Bohrer said that the Peltier property would be the <br />recommended limit unless the existing piece of 6" pipe is <br />strengthened or replaced. The 6" pipe is the limiting factor. <br />Bruce Folz asked if the County has approved tearing up the road <br />without requiring a:complete overlay. <br />Engineer Bohrer has contacted the County and they approve the <br />proposal, as presented. fie explained the loop being considered, <br />for the future, that would handle the fire flow pressure <br />Cal Bartly asked why the watermain wasn't extended when it was <br />put in. <br />Mayor Eder said the City boundary, at that time, was the controlling <br />factor. <br />Cal Bartly suggested replacing all the 6" pipe with 8" pipe and <br />extend the line to the end of the lake. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.