Laserfiche WebLink
<br />2. C.B.5ll - Levying assessments for paving, sanitary and storm s'ewers on wildwood <br />Street from Inglewood Street to 450 feet north; Ridgeway Drive from <br />Flintridge Avenue to 450 feet north; Inglewood Street from west <br />boundary of 2nd Addition to Flintridge to 450 feet west; Ironwood <br />Street from Ridgeway Drive to 650 feet north and Cedar Ridge from <br />Ironwood Street to Wildwood Street; Sanitary and storm sewers in <br />area between 320 feet east and 800 feet west of Wildwood Street <br />from 100 feet north to 1000 feet north of Flintridge, Avenue (73-35) <br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />3. C.B.5l2 - Levying assessments for sanitary sewer in area between Candlelight <br />Drive and 900 feet west of Candlelight Drive from 160 feet north to <br />160 feet south of Royal Avenue (73-52) <br /> <br />Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Wood that the council bills be submit~ed <br />for second reading. Motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />Comm <br />" 5/1/74 <br />Approve <br /> <br />K. : Peti tions <br />il. Paving and sanitary sewers within Snelling Plat - 100% <br />;2. Paving and sanitary sewers within Benson Plat - 100% <br /> <br />i <br /> <br />I <br />j <br />I <br />L, <br /> <br />Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Wood to approve the peti tions. Motion <br />carried unanimously. . -~~,' <br />- ~ l !~. <br /> <br />Comm <br />,) <br />i 5/1/74 <br />: Approve <br /> <br />L. Council Minutes - April 8, 1974 as circulated <br /> <br />Approve <br /> <br />e. <br /> <br />M. Letter from'Hsou-Eh' universityiie'igiworhoo(rAsSoc~D3.tion' ::: 'couiicTiina'n'-Keiier-r'eceive(Y---/ <br />'a letter from the South University Neighborhood Association criticizing the City's <br />iresponse to a clean-up party the Association had last weekend. He stated it should \ Comm <br />;possibly be investigated, 'if city government is going to be responsive. He wanted 4/;24/?4 <br />,to share the letter with the Council. Manager said that, in order to conserve time,;Afflrm <br />:perhaps staff could put together a memo re: reasons why the City was not responsive, <br />>which it thinks are valid reasons. , , ,.,. <br />" <br /> <br />N. :j.fali' Actl.''VIfij -:.. CounClIwoiiianBealre'quested some"cTarifi';a'ti;~;;';' 'Eh~ p'osi ti'~-;;6'ou;;il: <br />,'took on establishing procedures for limiting qommercial activity in the Mall. Manager <br />said'his recollection was that it was decided to let it take its own course for about <br />~a year and see what happens. Councilman Keller reported tha't no officiii1.l action was <br />'taken following the Mall Activities Committee report.Mrs~ Beal then stated that the <br />ERA minutes indicate a unanimous decision to encourage Council to setuPPFocedures <br />fforproviding activities, including limited commercial activity,' in the Mall. She <br />wondered if this action would re-open the matter. She suggested Councii take some <br />action on that and perhaps put it on a future agenda and have the ERA present. ERA <br />~:Director Dave Hunt said it is felt that now is the time to set up procedures before, <br />....1 space becomes available in the Central Transit Station and other parking structures <br />, i that may be developed. Mrs. Beal felt guidelines should be set,'ana Manager suggested, <br />~isome inter-staff dialogue and perhaps a committee of the City Council and ERA board <br />': might be desirable to consider al ternatives. If agreeable to Council, Ci ty will <br />(proceed on that basis. <br /> <br />Comm <br />4/i4/74 <br />Affirm <br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />O. Costs of--drowEii --birecting-.st'ciff to Prepa'-re 'a.. Cost and Time Estimate'. Cbntinuation of <br />,Council Discussion from Previous Committee Meeting <br />iCouncil had had a preliminary discussion of Mrs. Beal's suggestion that the costs of <br />igrowth be undertaken by the City. Mr$. Beal said she thinks the study should include <br />not only capital costs but increased costs of service. She wanted to make that amendment, <br />to the original request. Mr. Keller $aid' his concern was whether it is necessaJ;Y. ,He : <br />asked staff to respond to that and also wanted a backyard figure on what is being talked ; <br />about. Manager said no effort has been made at the staff level to pull together an <br />outline of what the study would include, let alone the time or cost, because the <br />understanding was it was not definitely known if the staff would be aske~ to do that. <br />He added that the question of whether the study is necessary is a matter of judgment, <br />that it is always helpful to have updated information about costs so that ther~ will be <br />some notion as to the kinds of commitments being made to future budgeting. It is also <br />helpful to go through the exercise of looking into the future and projecting growth <br />patterns and service requirements to better plan a total program. If this is the <br />appropriate time, or not is not a recommendation staff is prepared to make. Additiona1ly,: <br />there are some proposed areas of discussion in the new Community Goals update effort <br />which would bear upon future growth patterns. These should perhaps -be finalized before <br />knowing the scope of any such study. <br /> <br />e. <br />=-- <br /> <br />, <br />lMr. Williams said this subject area is scheduled for discussion in the Community Goals <br />:Conference, recommending an update in the entire document. One position paper. deals <br />:with the question of growth. It is not appropriate at this time to state what that <br />,document calls for, but it is clearly responsive to Mrs. Beal's concern. It will be <br />distributed on the evening of the first Community Goals sessio~May 1 and will be <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />141, <br /> <br />5/6/74 - 14 <br />