My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_1977_0509
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
197x
>
1977
>
CC_Minutes_1977_0509
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 8:57:17 AM
Creation date
2/1/2005 2:47:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
5/9/1977
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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 />opposition. I was Chairman of the Planning Commission and <br />conducted the hearing and we voted to the Council that they <br />acquire the property. The property wasnlt acquired and a <br />year later it was split and it was gone. That's why I think <br />Ramsey County didnlt have the foresight to put it in and <br />Roseville did have the foresight to buy some property that <br />comprises about one of 22 park sites in the community. I <br />think lIve expressed myself at the public hearing. I don't <br />want to irritate people by asking them questions or dis- <br />agreeing with them because everybody is entitled to their <br />own opinion, but many times after a public hearing you go <br />horne, and sometimes these public hearings are continued on <br />to another date, and them the people donlt show up - the <br />ones you want to speak to about certain things, so I found <br />it's better to confront the person when they're there and <br />when they're at the public hearing itls an opportunity for you to <br />speak to them. I think (inaudible) planning, and the responsi~ <br />bility of the City Council is to develop the properties <br />to the best way they know how to develop. As far as plot <br />layout is concerned and street layout, itls up to our <br />engineering staff to determine what utility is required, and <br />it's difficult to disagree with the staff because the staff <br />in some instances (inaudible) thatls what theylre paid for is <br />to determine what utilities should go in, and I think that <br />whether the developer or the prime land owner - be it any <br />one of you people or George Reiling - he has a right to <br />develop his property and basically I'm in favor of the proposal <br />as submitted. <br /> <br />Councilman Grauel then introduced the following resolution <br />and moved its adoption: <br /> <br />Resolution No. 6487 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CONSTRUCTION OF <br />IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-W-P-ST-76-23 UNDER AND <br />PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 429 <br /> <br />BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roseville, <br />Minnesota. that in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota <br />Statutes 1961, Chapter 429, as amended. the Council held a <br />public hearing pursuant to published notice, on the proposed <br />construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-76-23 consisting of <br />the installation of bituminous street, concrete curb and gutter, <br />storm sewer facilities, watermain, sanitary sewer mains and <br /> <br />-43- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.