My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_6474
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
06xxx
>
6400
>
res_6474
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:09:58 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 11:52:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
6474
Resolution Title
Ordering the construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-76-22 under and pursuant to Minnesota statutes, chapter 429
Resolution Date Passed
4/4/1977
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />years. at that particular ~ima the ~ost of those improvements are <br />excessive in the minds of anybody ~ho has to P2Y for the~. Years <br />ago, ~!)hatever the improvement ~:'ent in, it was 2 great deal of money <br />vt that time to the peopleo As time goes on the cost of these im- <br />provements continued to increase andg '::ertainly it's a grewt deal of <br />money to everybody today. <br /> <br />BE. DAVI;.-;: ~ I don't make near the money nOVJ that I made then. <br />I'm on Social Security now. <br /> <br />)>1AYOH DErJ10S ~ Any other questions? <br /> <br />COUNCILI/LAN ANDEn:jON~ I'll just ;nake one statement that the <br />City of Roseville does have about 20 miles of the type of street <br />that is being proposed for this projecto Those 20 miles of street <br />,,,ere pa id for by the peol?le that bought the houses in those areas. <br />NOi.'}. if we tvere to have 100% assessmen';:; on just the street a Ion? in <br />front of these houses, the assessment would come tOg I believe, <br />something close to $25 per front foot. Now, this is what you ,liould <br />pay for a new street in front of your house. ':;:'his is what any un- <br />developed property in the city right now will pay if they put in <br />streets this year. It will be very close to this, but with the new <br />policy '\r;'e set. and this policy as far as I was concerned, I voted <br />for it on the basis that, yes, we've gone through a lot out here <br />in the City of Roseville putting in our sanitary sewer, our w2terg <br />our storm sewerg and I just feel that ~e should put in a street <br />system with as little cost to the taxp2yer 2S we possibly can. This <br />assessment is down to the'Jmount that I believe it I S (J state la~~i <br />that requires us to assess that much. He cannot put the street in <br />any cheaper than what we're proposing here and that's by state law, <br />so j.f ,ve \Va it and don't do it no'" p the r::ost is going to continue <br />to go up. There's just no way it can be put in cheaper than being <br />proposed no\v. <br /> <br />111m. DP'vIS ~ Phy do they have to T,.'iden the street nm,' all of a <br />sudden? 'fhe people on the other side C2n buy the property and hoOk <br />on to the se,~er and leave it the 'l.!my it is. That's my point. <br /> <br />riJAYOB D:Cl\10, , ~ I \-Jill say this - I 'vent down there and that is <br />mighty, narrotv. <br /> <br />l'lF. i)j'},VL;~ Yes, it is - i.t alr,ili'ays hClS been. It's narrOtJer <br />now than when we tried to get it widened. The people on the corner <br />hc:ve half their yard out in the roadway. <br /> <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.