My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 09-11-2000
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
CC 09-11-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:11:32 PM
Creation date
11/9/2006 2:05:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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 />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 11, 2000 <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />was willing to carry the Section 8 vouchers for one additional ycar, he may be willing to discuss <br />. the issue with the City. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst asked if it was known whether the sale of the property was imminent. Mr. Lynch <br />statcd that he was not certain, Mayor Probst suggested that the first step would be to determine if <br />the property is expected to sell in the near future. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a <br />motion to direct City Staff to determine whether the owner of the Huntcr's Park <br />Apartment intends to sell the property in the near future and to encourage the <br />property owner to continue to make affordable housing available within the <br />apartment complex. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />B. 2001 Pavement Management Program (PMP) <br /> <br />1. Combined Staff/Review Group Recommendations <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated that City Staff will provide a review of the proposed recommendations for <br />the 2000/200 I Street Improvement Project. The City Council will then discuss those <br />recommendations and the net result of tonight's action will be to offer direction to the City <br />Engineer and Staff in terms of revising the feasibility study, Once the revised feasibility study is <br />completed, it will come back to the City Council for further discussion to determine whether to <br />proceed with or to modify the project. He asked that if an audience member wished to address <br />the Council they raise their hand and come to the microphone. He asked that the audience <br />members identify themselves with names and addresses and to try to keep their comments <br />concise in order to expedite this discussion, <br /> <br />Mr. Brown provided a summary of the 2000/2001 Street Improvement Project issues, He stated <br />that the need for street reconstmction was determined through a Citywide rating ofthe streets. <br />He stated that the city streets were grouped into neighborhoods and the streets were rated <br />according to the surface condition of the streets, whether the streets had curb and gutters, their <br />widths, whether there was a drainage system, and the water quality. <br /> <br />Mr. Brown stated that the Ingerson neighborhood had been identified through the rating process <br />as needing an entire reconstmction of all the streets in some form, He stated that other factors <br />considered in making this determination was the water quality benefits that could be gained, the <br />availability of funds via State Aid, the general condition of the streets and existing drainage <br />system, and the lack of curbs and gutters. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Brown stated staff agrees that the project has merit but is willing to address neighborhood <br />concerns with design, The Task Force generally concurs that the project has merit with change, <br />With regard to whether the original feasibility report should be adopted, staff agrees that the <br />original report needs revising to address neighborhood concerns, The Task Force also agrees that <br />the original report needs revising, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.