My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_1980_0825
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
198x
>
1980
>
CC_Minutes_1980_0825
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 8:58:44 AM
Creation date
2/2/2005 5:22:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/25/1980
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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 />3 <br /> <br />was withdrawn from the plan. <br /> <br />MR. POPOVICH: The to tal combined cost of this consolidated <br />improvement was $415,499.61 of which $81,426.08 is recommended <br />to be picked up by special assessments, and the balance by <br />general taxes or state aids. <br /> <br />The storm sewer portion was $228,923.93 of that larger <br />amount, of which $44,909.80 will come up on the assessments. It <br />will be assessed according to the normal City policy of $295 <br />per lot on residential buildable lots, unbuildable $590, and <br />double that for the other acreage that's involved. The <br />street, curb and gutter is $157,111.63 of that larger total, <br />of which $13,783.08 will be picked up by special assessments. <br />It's all against the church at $88.66 a front foot since <br />residential property isn't assessed when on a State Aid Street. <br /> <br />Sanitary sewer services are $4,996.10 - one property owner <br />with five services requesting that - that's 100% assessed, as <br />well as the water services of $3,535.04. <br /> <br />The sidewalk cost is $14,202.06 which works out to $14.91 <br />a front foot for the assessment and that's the amount the City <br />was billed for by the state because they let that contract. <br /> <br />It's recommended that this be spread over20 years with <br />the normal carrying charges and normal rights to prepay. <br /> <br />MR. NORTH reported that a letter had been received from <br />Mrs. Elizabeth Schmidt, 2865 North Hamline requesting that <br />there be a deferment of her assessments since she's presently <br />serviced by previous installations and allowed the openings <br />to save the City of Rosevi1le expensive street repairs in <br />the future. <br /> <br />MR. NORTH also reported that a letter had been received <br />from Condor Corporation, owners of the All State Insurance <br />Company building requesting that no assessments be. made against <br />their property under Improvement 79-4rsince there is no benefit. <br /> <br />MR. RON REILLY, representing the Centennial Church: <br />Objected to the sidewalk assessment since that property is noh <br />usable by the church. Mr. Reilly asked why the church is being <br />assessed for sewer, curb and gutter and no one else is. Mayor <br />Demos explained that other properties are subject to general <br />taxes, but the church is not, and this is the only method of <br />charging the church for its share of the cost. <br /> <br />MR. DICK STEINER: He was the former owner of the southeast <br />corner of Snelling and County Road C-2. When the property was <br />condemned, he was left with just a small piece. It's an unusual <br />piece of property and he doesn't believe it will be improved <br />by $1,066, which is the amount of his assessment. Mr. Steiner <br />furfuer said he believed the property had already been assessed <br />for storm sewers. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.