My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 04/15/1986 - Public Hearing
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
1986
>
Minutes - Council - 04/15/1986 - Public Hearing
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 8:38:45 AM
Creation date
11/5/2003 1:54:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Title
Public Hearing
Document Date
04/15/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
paying for a system that would not give us any relief for 15 years -- when the <br />system is totally developed. By that time the water could have already <br />destroyed the property; the property will be taxed to the maximum; no idea what <br />costs will be to large areas like farmland; and just like what happened in Coon <br />Rapids, the City will confiscate the properties because of tax forfeit~ Cost <br />of the projects has a lot to do with determining which financing method to go <br />with. <br /> <br />Keith Kiefer - 6203 Rivlyn Avenue - Is Rivlyn Avenue included in one of these <br />two taxing districts? Just received notice of the public hearing today in the <br />City newsletter. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka - Rivlyn Avenue is not included in the taxing districts being <br />considered tonight. <br /> <br />Barbara Graen- 7321 150th Lane NW - Why are we concentrating on these two <br />districts rather than the whole city? <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley - These two districts are areas with specific problems. One of the <br />city's concerns is that we are able to respond to the needs of the areas <br />experiencing flooding problems. Within the next month we hope to present a <br />recommendation for the establishment of the remaining districts within the <br />community. <br /> <br />Barbara Graen- What would happen if these two areas go with taxing districts <br />and other areas choose to go with special assessments? <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley - It would be appropriate to deal with financing storm sewer <br />systems in an equitable and uniform way and hope that Council will take this <br />into consideration. <br /> <br />Lynn Ackerman - 15330 Jackel Street NW - We bought our home 10 years ago; were <br />aware of the water tables; were told we would not see municipal improvements <br />for 10-15 years. Why were developers allowed to develop in wet areas? The <br />developers should be called back to pay for some of these costs. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley - If a person wants to develop a piece of property, there are <br />procedures he must follow. The city evaluates the plat for wetlands, street <br />layout, etc. Then a recommendation is made to Council to either accept the <br />proposal or modify it in some way and establish a developers agreement. Once <br />that agreement is established, we have told the developer to develop as <br />proposed with the city's requirements established. It is possible that the <br />city did not require or observe that these areas would become wetter. Right <br />now in city government, there is a lot of debate about where to place roads, <br />wet areas, etc. It is possible that years ago some of those requirements were <br />not as visible. <br /> <br />Lynn Ackerman - Has anyone contacted the developer? <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley - We have a copy of the developers agreement and those agreements <br />have to completed or fulfilled. The developer provides escrow money to insure <br />the agreements are fulfilled; that money is released when the developer has <br />completed all of his obligations in the agreement. Beyond that, the city <br /> April 15, 1986 <br /> <br />Page 5 of 12 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.