My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2004_0524
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2004
>
CC_Minutes_2004_0524
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:30:09 AM
Creation date
2/9/2006 12:53:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
5/24/2004
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
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
<br />To: City Council <br />From: Neal Beets <br />Date: Saturday, 5/22/04 <br />Re: Possible County Road B-2 Street, Sidewalk, and Utility <br />Undergrounding Project <br /> <br />SUMMARY: Speaking solely for myself, I support the construction of <br />5'-6' concrete sidewalks immediately adjacent to both sides of <br />County Road B-2 from Lexington to Rice Street. I also support recon- <br />structing B-2 from Hamline to Rice Street. By reconstructing B-2, I <br />mean that the City and the County would cooperate in a Project that <br />would remove the current street pavement, regrade the street bed to <br />resolve elevation and drainage problems, create a new pavement bed <br />and new pavement complying with current street construction stan- <br />dards, and would include concrete curbs and gutters from Hamline to <br />Rice Street. I also favor a City policy of undergrounding utility lines <br />when they are adjacent to a City street or pathway project, such as <br />along B-2 from Victoria to Rice Street. My reasons follow. <br /> <br />I. The B-2 Pathway Project in General <br /> <br />1. No Property Acquisition. The sidewalk or pathway would be built <br />entirely on public property. No private property needs to be ac- <br />quired. So we are talking about the use of public property, not pri- <br />vate property. <br /> <br />2. Our Decision Making Standard Ought To Be: What Is In The <br />Best Interest Of The City Long-Term? We have a duty to use pub- <br />lic property in the best interests of the entire City over the long- <br />term. <br /> <br />3. Roseville Residents Pay Lots of Federal Taxes. This is an opportu- <br />nity to use some of those hard-earned dollars in our own commu- <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.