My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_7093
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
07xxx
>
7000
>
res_7093
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:13:47 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 12:05:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
7093
Resolution Title
Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. P-80-34 Under and Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429
Resolution Date Passed
1/26/1981
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 />MAYOR DEMOS: I will open the hearing and ask that each <br />speaker come to the microphone and give his or her name and the <br />street address of the property to which they're referring. <br /> <br />MR. LEO BOHANON, 1415 Brenner: I live right on the corner <br />of Brenner and Pascal. Since this is going to be charged on <br />linear foot and both projects are at the same time, it was <br />proposed, the City of Roseville had a proposal several years <br />ago to do all the streets in Roseville. At that time the <br />price was a lot less per linear foot but the people were only <br />going to be assessed for the frontage of their house. Is <br />this going to be true also for the people, the four of us who <br />are on the corners? Are we going to be assessed for the total <br />linear footage? Or just on the front? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: Good question. That's something I probably <br />should have gone through as I was on the floor. The assessing <br />policy of the City of Roseville at this time is really quite <br />similar to what it was at that time. Namely, that those par- <br />cels that have side property along Pascal, the long side, up <br />to at least 150 feet, I'm sure all of those are less than 150 <br />feet, are only assessed 1/10 of the distance on assessable <br />feet. So as an example, if there were 130 feet on the length <br />of Lot 7, which I think is your's, you would be assessed for <br />13 assessable feet along that side. Only 1/10 of the distance. <br />We feel there is some benefit having the road paved on the <br />sides. There's a bigger benefit to all of the City and the <br />rest Df the community too. They use that road just like you <br />use that road. So the policy of the City is to only assess <br />1/10. <br /> <br />MR. LEO BOHANON: I'd also like to know, if there is a <br />proposal in the future to do all streets in Roseville, maybe <br />we should just wait and do it all at the same time (inaudible). <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: I don't believe there will be (inaudible). <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: Not in the immediate future. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: Anyone else? <br /> <br />MR. EDWIN STEIm~ALL, 1443 Clarmar: Not being a contractor <br />and not into the business or anything, I'd just like to ask a <br />question. woodlynn, behind us, was paved a couple of years <br />ago. You put little tiny rocks down, with loose oil underneath <br />it. Is our street going to be the same way? If so, what is <br />the reason for that? <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: The reason for what you called the oil and <br />rock treatment on Woodlynn was because at the time of the <br />construction, someone, somehow had some vandalism or we'll <br />be charitable and say that there was gasoline on the pavement, <br />which detracted from the appearance of the street. It's not <br />that it was structurally so unsound, but it put a real blemish <br /> <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.