My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_6487
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
06xxx
>
6400
>
res_6487
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:10:00 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 11:52:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
6487
Resolution Title
Ordering the construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-76-23 under and pursuant to Minnesota statutes, chapter 429
Resolution Date Passed
5/9/1977
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
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 />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 wasn't acquired and a <br />year later it was split and it was gone. That's why I think <br />Ramsey County didn't 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 I've 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 />home, and sometimes these public hearings are continued on <br />to another date, and them the people don't 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 it's 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, it's 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) that's what they're 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.