My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
2003-004 Council Resolution
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
2003
>
2003-004 Council Resolution
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/2/2014 9:58:47 AM
Creation date
12/2/2014 8:47:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Master List Resolution
Meeting Date
01/13/2003
Council Meeting Type
Regular
Resolution #
03-004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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).
View images
View plain text
• <br />• <br />Elm Street <br />Rochelle Casey <br />Hark Selchow <br />59 Elm Street <br />Lino Lakes, AM 55014 <br />James E. Studenski, P.E. <br />Lino Lakes City Engineer <br />Dear Mr. Studenski, <br />We are writing this letter in response to the proposed <br />reconstrution of Elm Street between Lake Driue and Sunset in <br />Lino Lakes. This project, as portrayed to us, is something <br />Rochelle and I are vehemently opposed to. <br />Drainage ditches and pedestrian waIkwags were just put <br />in a few years ago. During the construction of the walkway, my <br />sprinkler system was destroyed. Furthermore, with the walkway <br />now in its current location, it cuts off about 1/3 of my Front <br />yard. This past summer, we spent close to S1,500.00 dollars to <br />repair damages sustained from the walkway installation. Please <br />don't think that I felt like putting that much money into <br />repairing something the citg destroyed, just to rip it back out <br />again? <br />The last point we wish to make is the new road itself, <br />and what issues this brings to the neighborhood. Raving lived <br />in a neighborhood in the past that had a new road put in, our <br />biggest concern is SAFTE9? Hewer, wider roads bring two things <br />along with them. One; vehicles travelling at a higher rate of <br />speed, and two; potential danger For the children of our <br />neighborhood. Elm Street already has a respectable uolune of <br />traffic due to the schools, church and access to shopping_ <br />Pedestrians, mostly children are quite numerous on a daily <br />basis. Adding width and new surfacing to this road at this <br />time would be like pouring gasoline on a fire to put it out? <br />It just is not fathomable. <br />PLEASE reconsider this proposal for the reconstruction <br />of Elm Street. It is our opinion that we share the same <br />feelings as many other residents of our lovely neighborhood. <br />Sincerely, <br />Rochelle & Mark <br />Page 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.