pf_00145 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

program as well as encouraged and helped to inv�stigate the possibili- ties. We should not lose sight of the fact that it is their money whi�h is ultimaiely being invested. They need sup�ort just as much as the lenders. The basic conclusion of this oan program w1 not have r �'�� ecline oi the reha in uir is that the Title I Horne Im rovement a ver�l si�ni icant e ect u�n arresting t�he, �il�tation areas eavo is an aint Paul. Only a ter a prodzgious e ort by many agencies and the blessing ot some favorable economic fac",ors is the program likely to get rolling on any- thing but a piecexneal basis. This is a program which is running against the stream of lendin,g attitudes, practices, experiences, and prejudices, and it will probably be some time before the stream's course can be altered. Assuming a major effort, its measurable effects will most lil�ely not be felt until the end of this decade. Water and 5ewage Systems. F'ublic health authorities anc� urban plan- ners generally hold that the provision of public water and waste disposal is a basic prerequisite for urban development service along with such things as streets and schools. TYie bulk of residential development be- tweeri 1950 and 1961 occurred without the provision of central water and sewage syst�ms. This was possible because the glacia.l drift on which the urban area is built lenc'_s itself to site-located systems (see Metro- politan Water Study, Part Ii; and Metropolitan Sewerage Study). It was the purpose of this study to investigate under what circumstances and in what manner the provision of sewer and water utilities have affected the location of residential development. Was development inhibited ar directed as a result of the absence or presence of these utility systems ? There are instances where the absence or presence of a water or sewage system made a difference of whether or not a particular subdivision was built. The lack of public utilities has retarded growth in sector� with physical problems w:n.ei�e on-site disposal systems were not satisfactory. b of these ublic s stems has not detes�red But, in eneral, the a. sence evelo ers rom locatin in unserved areas. The strength o this can- clusion varies between water and sewer systems; therefore, each is dis cus s ed individua�.ly. In the case of water, the situation appears fairly clear that the provision of this facility l�as not had a significant effect upon where development occurred in the Area. This conclusion can �rnost easily be supported by indicating that nine rapidly expanding suburban muni�ipalities with a tutal populati�on increase during the past decade of approximately 135, 000 people, did not have municipal water systems. Areas further out, such as, Plymouth, Minnetonka, and Brooklyn Park v�hich generally lie on the urhan fringe, ail had sizeable populat�on increases with only a very small proportion of the population served Uy a few isolated water sys - tem s. Even in B rooklyn C ente r whe re approximately 34 pe r c ent of the populati�:� (1960) was served by a water system, a substantial part of the increas<� in population was not served by this system. 36