My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_7621
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
07xxx
>
7600
>
res_7621
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:18:27 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 12:18:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
7621
Resolution Title
Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. SS-84-4 Under and Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429
Resolution Date Passed
7/9/1984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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 />ZITTLE: Well I think it should be tabled so it can be studied <br />and evaluated more and I think we should have more time and it <br />just came up in the last few days, and no one has really had a <br />chance to talk to anyone about it. It took them six months to <br />work it out and I think we should have more than a few days to <br />react. <br /> <br />DEMOS: This has been known for more than a few days. <br /> <br />ZITTLE: Well we contacted you several weeks ago, trying to set <br />up an appointment. <br /> <br />DEMOS: Does anyone else wish to be heard? <br /> <br />OLSON, 955 Roselawn: And I don't see why we should have sewer <br />on both ends of our property, it don't make sense to me. There <br />will be no benefit at this time, and when the road will be built <br />is hard to tell, and they may not build it over there anyways. <br />I'm against it just the same as Berwell, as I don't see what bene- <br />fit we would get from it. <br /> <br />DEMOS: Is he already connected, Charlie? I guess the only <br />benefit, as far as I can see is that it worrys me that we have <br />several areas in Roseville that are still being operated with sep- <br />tic tanks and cesspools, and sure they are working today but <br />tomorrow they could be a problem. My sympathy goes to anyone that <br />has to pump his out. I don't like the idea of it flowing down <br />into a swamp, I don't think that its healthy. We're a City of <br />36,000 and we are willing to pay our fair share for doing whats <br />right for the City as a whole. I guess the advantage to people <br />like the Burwells who will not have to pay anything now, but if <br />later you decide to sell your lot to someone you will be able to <br />ask a far better price for it because you will be able to tell <br />them they don't have to improve or subdivide. It therefore enhan- <br />ces the value of your property to have the sanitary sewer in <br />whether or not you use it now or 10 years from now. <br /> <br />BURWELL: How are we going to get to the property? <br /> <br />DEMOS: Well, when its developed there will have to be a road put <br />in, but in the meantime, you don't pay if it's not developed. <br /> <br />BURWELL: Then you are thinking of putting a road in? <br /> <br />DEMOS: Mr. Burwell, I want to say in all fairness, that even a <br />couple of years ago or more, some of that property has been for <br />sale for just that purpose ane even when it wasn't it was offered <br />for sale as multiple dwellings, I know because I answered the ad. <br />Therefore I know there has been thinking along the lines of <br />splitting some of that property. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.