Laserfiche WebLink
His land as it is now is of no value to him or anyone else with <br />no access to it. <br />We are not interested in purchasing any land from him at this point <br />in time. It was suggested by the council that we try to work <br />something out with him. You are placing both of us in a compromising <br />position. If he doesn't want the assessments, he should sell to <br />us, and if we want our project approved, we must buy from him or <br />offer to pay his assessments. It wasn't real clear what you were <br />asking us to do, but that seemed to be the jest of the conversation. <br />Buying additional property to make our project acceptable does not <br />seem to be a realistic approach when we are asking for no variance <br />or compromises from anyone. The fact that the park owner thinks <br />his property is undevelopable is not based on any factual evidence. <br />It is only his opinion, one of which he seems to have an abundance <br />of. <br />The only compromise we can seem to come up with at this time is to <br />not put Rose Place all the way through. It seems to be our only <br />viable alternative. <br />As a*builder and developer we have spent much time working with <br />your city planners. We are currently working in the City of Vadnais <br />Heights and the City of Maplewood both of which we have a very <br />harmonious working relationship. We are a member of the St. Paul <br />Area Builders Association and our entry into the Parade of Homes <br />for 1984 won. We would like the opportunity to develop a good <br />working relationship with your city also. <br />Thank you for your consideration. <br />Sincerely, <br />h � 9 <br />y <br />Patrick W. Goff <br />Goff Homes. <br />RncI, Copy of map of city showing, cul do sacs longer than what we <br />would have if you don't extend Rose Place past Pernwood Court. <br />