My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_6818
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
06xxx
>
6800
>
res_6818
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:12:04 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 11:59:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
6818
Resolution Title
Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-SW-79-4 Under and Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429
Resolution Date Passed
5/21/1979
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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 />5 <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: If you look at your feasibility studies <br />you will notice that the line jogs around her house as far as <br />the storm sewer assessment. <br /> <br />MR. STRONG: The storm sewer you're talking about came down <br />this property down here - included all of this area. That's <br />true. This area is the total area for both sidewalk assessment <br />and storm sewer. <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: All the brown indicates is that there's an <br />assessment for something. <br /> <br />MRS. LINDBERG: I know there's a law or something about <br />business property having sidewalk, but why run it to County Road <br />C-2 and then drop it? The senior citizens would have it easier <br />to walk if they had sidewalk all the way to (inaudible). <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: That was considered at an earlier hearing <br />and the Council did not order that improvement in. This was <br />part of a larger sidewalk presentation, but that other portion <br />was not ordered in. <br /> <br />MRS. LINDBERG: I didn't see them, but my son saw one of the <br />handicapped in a motorized vehicle going down C-2 and I would <br />think it would be easier on a sidewalk. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: We're hoping that in that portion of the <br />business area (inaudible) there will be a convenience market or <br />something and there would be use for that going that direction <br />too, but I would agree with you but the sidewalk was not <br />(inaudible). Is there anyone else? <br /> <br />MR. JAMES DORSEY, with the law firm of O'Connor and Hannan, <br />38th Floor, IDS Building. I represent Condor Corporation in <br />this matter and they're opposed to the improvement as it relates <br />to the sidewalk in front of their building. They own the Allstate <br />Insurance building, 2860 North Snelling. The problem is the <br />right-of-way that this frontage road is going to be placed upon <br />cuts very close to the front of the Allstate Insurance building. <br />As a matter of fact, it's right across the corner here - almost <br />touches the corner of the building. My client - when they found <br />out about the sidewalk going in front of the building - they <br />were concerned because it's only about three feet from the <br />building. They feel it's a detriment because they will have people <br />walking within three feet of the front of the building. They <br />have asked me to object to the improvement - at least the side- <br />walk improvement and assessment for their building. I don't know <br />if you can see this, but it's three feet. The sidewalk will come <br />right up to the front of the building. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.