Laserfiche WebLink
d <br /> I <br /> August s,1981 <br /> tel • on a severe wound, our experts. Not only _ <br /> 1. traffice sagerlane pas ,to trust firm Zeddob geTranspo tr Sound Councilnof Governments <br /> staff nds <br /> to study eeast/westgarterials in the City. <br /> most. The Police and Fire Department strongly support the five lane section in <br /> area <br /> 1 where the traffic will occur may severely hamper our a in <br /> ityhtprotect <br /> t the public. for tee ithree <br /> The citizens had to pay <br /> there was not enough suport <br /> o build the street big enough the first two <br />, times. The <br /> expense is not the only cost incurred when a <br /> enial <br /> rties during const, has to be rebuilt. Theruction is an to ask dust,dirt,mud,detours and apeople re street <br /> peopf access to <br /> prole to <br /> The eviddnce is clearly before you and the controlled no Road,as I'm try thhon Casino woad <br /> is at stake. I've been out on <br /> ave,and it is <br /> developing into a manageable multi-family developmeents. Open space e density r acct <br /> to spa a and <br /> recreation comparedreased when <br /> ion s are being provided. <br /> committed. we have $29 million of public funds to provide sewer <br /> million service to this <br /> • area. We have committed ndllions of dollars to construct a 25 <br /> reservoir <br /> new water <br /> ins to serve this area. We have <br /> d two large <br /> public parks nds. The south <br /> end fire iwa ter E.on will bemcons 164ted soon and acres and athe police annex sch Park,60 ewill be available <br /> in afew years. <br /> We have <br /> public fun to <br /> ehneservices <br /> growthfor the anticipated .the <br /> necessary y Prn <br /> TheserCit is the n tet. people on Casino Road to do anything different <br /> than tevery <br /> other property owner in <br /> exception by the Federal Gov the <br /> 1 <br /> Stre <br /> B street for <br /> byth abutting <br /> propreor e 55, s <br /> paid by <br /> eventual ass) Every oimproved acted(and <br /> s <br /> been paid for y <br /> b.l.b. <br /> _ hearing heed.lull 1 25 people <br /> 9 fetht ea t favor of the <br /> e• Strong <br /> 110 <br /> Pprotest. <br /> ,close aisis c h <br /> e <br /> revealed assessment 66,418,000therewas <br /> 11 $627,960.00i assessment s (9e8)a Protests <br /> representing 145 owners. One of the 10 property owners <br /> (Franklin <br /> er)i - binding <br /> the <br /> Poperty <br />!! protesting the Local improvement District due to a short plat <br /> u <br /> business nn <br />. Since compelling <br /> reason <br /> soYCityo acceptsuch <br /> aprotest,thepercentage protest i <br /> property owners (6.2$) <br /> C, $592,40000 <br /> assessment(9.28 of$6,419,000) <br /> I . She said there naa been an figure c <br /> the City should <br /> • Protest excluding the City's assessment <br /> remthatexcluding <br /> the <br /> City holds we Attorney. ifit is <br /> ss <br /> chose properties where the <br />', calculated based on that premise,the results are. <br />