07-28-1983 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

July 18, 1983 3091 Arcade Little Canada, MN 55109 The Honorable Mayor of the City Hall 515 . Little Little Canada Raymond Hanson City of Little Canada Canada Road , MN 55117 Dear Mr. Mayor, I have received notice that the City Council of the City of Little Canada will meet to consider improvements lying between the streets of Arcade and Greenbrier. At this time, Iwish to register my opposition to the said im- provements. My objection is firstly based on economic considerations. The assessment; per lot, according to the feasibility report for Improvement 83 -14 which t Mr. Carley indicated was adequate for the proposed LeMay Avenue, is $9,600. According to my real estate agent, the two lots resulting from the pro- posed improvement on my property would be valued at most to $25,000. Once sewer, watermains and adjustments to my current large lot are added to the assessment, the improvement to my property would be financially negligible. In fact, the western of the two lots created would be so small that it would require a variance to be buildable and would thus be practically un- saleable. I am not a land developer. I do not have the skills or knowledge necessary to manage the addition of two lots to my property. I can neither afford the assessment nor the cost of having the lots sold by an agent. My second objection is to the disregard of the scenic value oi. the property where the Improvement is planned. Scenic value of land is all too often completely ignored. In this case, I believe the loss of the forested area, which provides habitats to a variety of small animals including pheasant, as unnecessary. The demand for additional housing is not so great that it warrants the destruction of the beautiful woods between Greenbrier and Ar- cade. The dormancy of the fifteen acres of land within 500 feet of the proposed road should suffice as evidence to this point. Northeast Little Canada is characterized and valued for its large wooded lots. Although it may not be possible or practical to place a monetary value on those open and scenic areas, it should not be disregarded. Finally, I object to the proposed road on the basis that I believe a dan- gerous precedent is being set. Neither Tower Road or Lemay Avenue were on the City Grid Map (that was presented to me when I enquired) until the Im- provement was initiated. Further, the proposed LeMay Avenue is discontinued at the edge of 3033 Arcade, effectively increasing the assesssment per lot to the abutting property as the NSP easement cannot be directly assessed. It is no secret that the Improvement has been initiated by Mr. LeMay and that it brings most benefit to him. But in the interest of sustaining good- neigh- borly relations, I do not wish to criticize him or prohibit him from deve- loping his own land. I do,however, strenuously object to the burden being placed on my property and myself. 1 therefore submit this to your attention asking you to serve all interests involved as faithfully as you can. Respectfully, Madalen T. Merritt Copies to:Scalze, Nardini -Forsberg, Fahey 43 Carley.