1981_0713_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE NUMBER-. 1304-81 APPLICANT: City of Roseville 6 May 1981 Pag e 4 in our residential areas, which all communities have taken great pains to attempt to protect by the adoption of numerous controlling ordinance relating to residential development and occupancy. Dace the investment is made, and all the tubes are in place � it will be too late and perhaps unreasonable to demand that they all be removed. Thus , it would seer as though if a solution is to be evolved, the time perhaps is now, 9. Some general numbers on cost were elicited from the meeting including a figure of $5.00 per hour paid to the motorized route carrier and a mileage rate of $0.23 per mile. The costs relating to an at -door delivery, compared with motorized delivery in tube under varying conditions is the cost element most related to the general solution. Perhaps this cast versus benefit on the part of the consumer is the crucial question. Hopefully, the Planning Commission and Council will be able to resolve a reasonable solution with the-cooperation of the newspaper representatives concerned b to . It would seem as though the best solution in terms of service and minimal aesthetic impact is one where the papers delivered to the door without the presence of a newspaper tube at the curb. A compromise solution might include the use of a single ear th -tone colored unmarked tube placed one per household, or perhaps shared by more than one (perhaps two) * A townhouse project in Roseville, we are informed, utilized a shared box system. The newspaper representatives in general x however, claim that such a system results in frequent stolen and misl.ocated papers for individual customers.