Laserfiche WebLink
•4. L. •i -}yt . <br />IN NONE. x xxx�x x x� xxxxxxx ®RNWHIN111 <br />xx.�x:xx x x %xi <br />944 Transit Avenue <br />Roseville, MN 55113 <br />March 1, 1982 <br />The Honorable June Demos <br />Mayor of Roseville <br />2660 civic center Drive <br />Roseville, MN 55113 <br />Dear Madam: <br />sub_1_ect * storm sewer pro i ect ST-80-30 <br />�[� ��� [ i -� wow.[ . [ w+ [ w�������.. - [�[�• -[ :w. <br />As a property owner at 944 Transit Avenue, I have <br />received notice of a pending assessment of $429 for <br />the above referenced prod ect . <br />I am unable to attend the March 8 Council Meeting due <br />to business travel. However, I would like the Council <br />to ]snow I support this endeavor and, in fact, thin] <br />it is long overdue. T <br />I do question the method of assessment. I understand <br />those property owners on Transit Avenue from victoria <br />to Brooks will be assessed the same rate as my assess- <br />ment; however, they will benefit by having street <br />repair and curbing installed* My assessment is <br />identical and yet I do not receive any of these <br />benefits. <br />If at a future time curbing and street repair is done <br />on Transit, from Books west, I will be assessed again. <br />It does not seem equitable that I should be assessed <br />the same rate as others while not receiving the same <br />benefit. I would be willing to pay a greater assess - <br />ment if the curbing and street, repair would extend to <br />ray property. However, I f eel that those who do not <br />have this benefit should not be taxed at this same rate . <br />I hope my opinions will be given consideration and <br />that it is clear that I am in favor of the project <br />but question the me tho a of assessment. <br />Thank ou. <br />f <br />4 <br />Roger chrii stense <br />copy: Thomas Curley <br />Polly Franke <br />Alvin Kehr <br />Vern Johnson <br />