CCMin_69Mar6_Public_Hearing - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2 - Falcon Heights ?•rould have to be the ones to pay the ~11~.2000. The_re is no benefit to the Village and th i,, ?thole problem ?-ra,s caused by -the County in building -Rosela?.m avenue. Obviousl` r , , the nine ton roved proposed. is not for Falcon LIeights but, for , _~oseville' s corm!erci a1 complex. 11n additi opal considerati on is that the County ?rill pay 100; o.f the center -travel porti on, that is the center 22 feet. On -the outside, or_ pa,rld_ng lanes, they wi11 pay 2~~ of the cost and 25' of -the cost of the concrete curb o,nd ~nztter ?~:hich are rerui.red. on this type of project. However, the remaining 7>~' o_f the parking lanes and curb and gutter , together with the catch basins and o~:,her extras, are to be borne by the abui;ting property o~finers or the municipality, as the case may be, ?bout ten roads are being dropped from the County's long range plan. I tirould like to Icno?~r ?thy. The recourse is a type of taxation; therefore, ever~Tone who benefits from it should pay. The Council can in my estimation pass this improvement. The point to attack thG~ Council's a.etion ?,could be at the tide of the adoption of the asses~~ent ro11 ?•rhich requires another hearing under Minnesota I~a?~r. At this time, the procedure ti~rould be to ~-rotest and object to the assessment, setting forth the legal .reasons a.nd grounds, and if the Council did not accept the objection, then a.n appeal can be made to the l7i strict Court of Ramsey County at that tire. Falcon heights could reasonably deny this project. I think that the best ?~r~~r to approach this thin; ?.could be to have a continuance of the matter and h^.ve a meeting ?~rith the County Enineers, so that ?-re could a17. be fully apprised of the plans of the County and. the plans of Roseville. Tlayor TTarkentien: Roseville is going tirhether ?•re go or not and they are losing by including Falcon Heights for ~1L~,000.UO. 'v1e have never been assessed far County roads. (He cited Larpenteur, Rosela?-m and Garden as ex<.znples.) Roseville ha.s to get the pipes in for the Fairvie?~r and 36 interch~.nge before the overpass goes through. Engineer ±,ernbe-rg: Roseville has the bids and the contractor is ready to begin. If ?ae are not going to be included, then they are going to cut do?~m the size of the pipes to acconti,_odate their people only. ~~egarding the culvert - ?re moonlighted a.nd put it in ourselves tiiithout a pex:mit from the County, The County can .remove tlz^.t culvert. If they fill the property on the ~Zoseville side i-t won't have a ditch to floti~r into. The County has to date paid f'or all drainage ?~~~ithin its right of ?-Tay and has paid all its share of ~:oseJ_awn, Garden and Harnline Avenues. The procedure for drainage districts has boon established for a convenience to assess ratter than tx~r ~to establish the exact crainage. IZayor ~°Ia.r'Lentien: If ?.re did postpone this fora ?~ree1~,?Tould it be too long? engineer Lemberg: I art! sure that they ?-could ?-raft. ti~~e have un opportunity, hotirever., to take care of this area,, ti~1e have a, moral obligation because the ?rater does come fror~? Falcon Heights. ?~;a.yor tiJU.rkentien: ti~7e could discuss this ?:pith less tension tonight if ?=re did not make a decision tonight. ti•Te have the same situation in the NF section in reverse. ?~Je oversized our pines for Roseville so that the ?,rater could flo?•r into the Lodi rey pit . l~~r . 1~icCleery 1918 Autumn Engineer Lembe Isn't ~o:seville required to lay storm se?~rer for our ?-later so it can eventually be h^ndled if it drains into their area? ZTO, the~r a.re not.