My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.2. SR 03-20-2006
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2006
>
03/20/2006
>
6.2. SR 03-20-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:35:49 AM
Creation date
3/16/2006 2:53:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
3/20/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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 />road would run is sizeable enough such that it would have the least impact to <br />homeowners on either side. We would support the road next to us, provided we had <br />some support with sound.,.barrier via landscaping, sidewalks for pedestrian traffic, (which <br />is an issue today) and no impact to our own property. <br /> <br />Obviously, we hesitate to fully support ANY of these options, given that these are only <br />proposals. There are so many obstacles that could impact these options and the direction <br />the road would take. If we support one of the options, and it suddenly changes, we may <br />not support it anymore; and then, what options do we have? Should a road go past our <br />house, any of our 5 homes, what do we lese -individually and collectively in property <br />values? What compensation is given for lost property value? What traffic risks do we <br />assume with traffic noise, safety for our children, traffic controls? What is the domino <br />effect: are we suddenly then pushed for city sewer and water improvements as a result of <br />the new road construction and potential development east of us? Are we imposed upon <br />and assessed in the future for .additional or future road impr-ovements because we abut a <br />new road? <br /> <br />With so many questions and so much unknown in terms of the various ways these initial <br />proposals could change, we cannot support anyone particular option. Our least favored <br />option is one that negatively impacts our home and property in ANY way as well as the <br />option that severely impacts the family under Option 1. Our most favored option is #3, <br />provided it was planned and implemented in the best interests of those properties <br />adjoining the new road. Should our property be targeted, we will enter into fair <br />-negotiations, but it will not be without challenge. And that, above all, is what concerns <br />us the most. We have tried to fight City Hall before, and we have learned how futile that <br />can be. <br /> <br />Finally, we ask that, in whatever direction you take with this, you make a expeditious <br />decision. The more prolonged the decision-making, the more prolonged we are from <br />making planned household or landscape improvements. None ofus on Tyler St. want to <br />invest in improvements if they'll be destroyed or wasted. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Janet and Ron Cardinal <br /> <br />cc: Terry Mauer <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.