My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2008_0908
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2008
>
CC_Minutes_2008_0908
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/20/2008 2:02:29 PM
Creation date
10/20/2008 1:56:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/8/2008
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
61
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, September 08, 2008 <br />Page 11 <br />the property owner be billed for all actual and administrative costs; and if those <br />charges remain unpaid, staff is to recover costs as specified in Minnesota Statute, <br />Section 407.07B; with costs to be reported to the City Council following the <br />abatement. <br />Councilmember Roe concurred with other City Councilmember comments and <br />connections to previous issues with this same property owner; specifically when <br />this property was in an area of Roseville with existing issues. Councilmember <br />Roe encouraged the HRA to keep close tabs on the situation. <br />Councilmember Pust sought clarification from City Attorney Squires as to how <br />the assessment would be applied for payment: to that of Cotttonwood Holdings or <br />to the property owners of the three sold and occupied units. <br />City Attorney Squires advised that he would need. to review the Condominium <br />Association Bylaws and other provisions, as he was not familiar with the history <br />of the ownership before tonight's meeting. <br />Councilmember Pust clarified that it was certainly the obvious will of the City <br />Council, from her perspective, that this financial hit was felt by the developer, not <br />the three occupied units; and for the record, stipulated that intent for staff as they <br />proceeded with the abatement, and any resulting action in assessing the property. <br />Councilmember Ihlan suggested amending the motion to make that intent clear in <br />the requested action; directing staff to assess the property owner. <br />Councilmember Willmus suggested specifically naming the developer, Cotton- <br />wood Holdings. <br />City Attorney Squires suggested identifying "the developer," and specifically set- <br />ting aside the three individual owners. <br />After further discussion, it was consensus opinion that any action to certify as- <br />sessments would come back before the City Council at a Public Hearing this fall <br />for assessment roll approval; and staff was directed to flag this property to ensure <br />Council intent to assess the developer at that time, and set aside the three property <br />owners occupying the building at this time. <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Roe; Ihlan; Willmus; Pust; and Klausing. <br />Nays: None. <br />d. Consider Request for City Abatement at 1780 Centennial Drive <br />Permit Coordinator Don Munson reviewed the request for abatement as detailed <br />in the staff report dated September 8, 2008; status of the property and ownership; <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.