09/14/1970 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r-- " 'r I I <3Z 3 e \ \ 9/14/70 .: :,- : I I I Public Works Director said notation was made on plans kept by his department of the I I requirement for setback sidewalk. In answer to Mrs. Hayward, he said the sidewalk permit is so I written that it outlines all requirements regarding placement, zoning,setback, width of parking _ strip, etc. , II There was further discussion how non-compliance was handled by inspectors and other procedures. II Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov that the city deny the request of Mr~,Hiatt for - I II waiver of setback sidewalk requirement. 'I Mrs. Hayward commented that the Council should deny this waiver because persons building lin I the community should certainly read documents granted from the City. The information was a"ailable to Mr. Hiatt, and the city would be in a bad position if it granted the waiver. I II Mr. Williams was concerned that the opportunity to properly inform Mr. Hiatt was missed, II and that he was not stopped from pouring the sidewalk improperly: I Mr. Hiatt requested that the city install the sidewalk according to specifications and e I assess his property for the cost. I \I Vote was taken on the motion as stated, Motion carried. \1 City Manager said he could see no objection to granting Mr. Hiatts request for city Ii Ii installation of sidewalk with assess,ment to property. I' I I I Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov that the city install the sidewalk to II specifications and assess Mr. Hiatt's property for the cost. Motion carried. Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward to approve Item 2 of the Committee report. Motion carried. II 3. Review and Possible Revision of Public Works Inspection Procedures - Councilman Williams I II suggested that the Public Works Department consider revising inspection procedu~es so 'I 'that notice of non-compliances observed by inspectors will be called to the attention of II the owner in writing, with copy retained by the City. Public Works Director will study this suggestion. I I II I Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward to receive and file Item 3 of the Committee Report. I! Motion carried. I[ 4. Declaration of City Intent, 1-105, extension of Jefferson Street Bridge - Several months I. 'I ago the Council approved the concept of park development between Washington and Jefferson 'I II Streets from 1st Avenue to 7th Avenue. This proposal has been approved by the State !I Highway Department, but the Bureau of Public Roads has expressed need for financial commitment by the city for on-site development. Council has no authority to commit future II budgets, but could declare its intention to budget funds for this purpose. I, il Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward to approve Item 4 of the Committee report. Motion carried. II Councilman Williams did not wish to have the Council committitself to specific funds and suggested I II the Council only commit i tse'lf to support of the concept and make every effort to budget money 1 for that particular development. He was concerned the money m~ght not be available when needed, I and this would create a bad impression. I seconded by Mrs. Beal Mr:. HWi'ili_ams_moviOl'lthat the City Council support the multiple use concept of development agreed \ upon-ny-Parks and~Recreation and B~reau of Public Roads and indicate that it intends to develop certain facilities in the park portion of the project which will be spelled out; that II the Council intends to complete the project in a five year period, and that the Council will . make every effort to secure appropriations for the projects mentioned. Vote taken. Motion I carried. 5. Buckley House, Clarification of Amount Budgeted - Budkley House had requested $7500 be I II budgeted to assist in their operation. This was an increase of $1000 over 1969-70. Staff recollection is that the amount approved was $6500. However a contract was signed for I' $7500, resulting in confusion how much wa~ ,actually budgeted. II 1 I , It was the Council consensus the amount budgeted was $6500. If this will not cause Mr. t I I Buckley any great problem, the contract should be amended to correct the appropriation. I Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward to ~~ce.tve~~t~fii~_~'l~~'-~<5.~~'~),_--tlJe-c';~mi ~~~ report. ! Motion carried. ~:' II 6. Alley Paving, Decrease in Scope ,between Clark and First and Jefferson and Madison - Council ,,~' I I approved petition for paving of the alley in the block bounded by Clark, 1st Avenue"'and Jefferson , 11 and Madison. Since that time; a request has been made for deletion of certain names from the ,=~ I peti tion, thereby reducing the original request. Staff recommends that only the east half of ,,:_' ~ ( the alley between Clark and 1st Avenue running from gefferson to Madison be authorized for I ,I paving at this time. ,\ " II Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov that the staff recommendation as outlined above L be approved. Motion carried. II Mrs. E dn a J ens en, 41 Madi s on St ree t, s ai d paving 0 f this alley was to accommodate an apartment house, e :1 and that the grade of half the alley had been raised, thereby causing drainage into property on the I ~' 9/14/70 - 5 I I .L