|
<br />..
<br />
<br />Minutes of Regular Council Meeting, Page Three
<br />February 3, 1986
<br />
<br />The motion to amend original motion carried (Sather, Peck, Hicks in favor,
<br />Woodburn, Hansen opposed).
<br />
<br />Original motion carried unanimously. (5-0) (Resolution No. 86-8, ORDERING
<br />CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENT NO. P-85-3, AND ORDERING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
<br />THEREFOR. )
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Feasibility Study - Under~round Power Lines or Power Liens on Only One
<br />Side of Hamline Avenue
<br />Council was referred to Parks and Recreation Committee minutes (1/25/86)
<br />recommending a feasibility study re costs of burying lines, or moving
<br />all to one side of Hemline Avenue, to enhance landscaping possibilities
<br />and improve safety. Miller explained that he had given the Parks Committee
<br />a very rough, uneducated estimate of $500,000+ (based on extension of
<br />costs of burying lines on County Road E in 1981); Parks Committee had
<br />felt that, although the cost seemed so high as to make the possibiity
<br />unrealistic, it would like a study made by NSP to obtain a more accurate
<br />figure for discussion. Miller added that, based on past experience,
<br />it would require significantly more research and engineering to determine
<br />cost more definitely. Engineer Christoffersen stated that NSP would
<br />bill the City for the costs of the study.
<br />
<br />Mike Lamey, 1349 Colleen, asked where land for burying lines would come
<br />from. Christoffersen stated NSP already has easements; would not require
<br />more land.
<br />
<br />Lorraine Manuel, 4408 Hamline Ave., expressed opposition to the study
<br />and burying cable if it would add to the special assessment.
<br />
<br />Sather noted that the planned improvement of Hamline, to be completed
<br />in 1987, will probably look pretty good; however, in considering aesthetics,
<br />Parks Committee felt it would be in our best interests to have this study;
<br />also felt the underground installation is more free from wind and storm
<br />damage. (It was noted that NSP states that maintenance costs are equal
<br />for either above-ground or below-ground lines, probably because underground
<br />lines are more expensive to service.)
<br />
<br />Hicks moved, seconded by Hansen, that Council discontinue any further
<br />studies on costs of putting power lines underground on Hamline Avenue.
<br />Motion carried (Woodburn, Hansen, Peck, Hicks in favor; Sather opposed)
<br />( 4-1)
<br />
<br />Tax Forfeited Land. Out lots A and B, Chatham Fourth Addition
<br />Council was referred to Parks and Recreation Committee minutes, (1/25/86)
<br />recommending that Village not acquire these two pieces of tax forfeited
<br />land. In discussion, McNiesh stated that, if the Village does not accept
<br />them, they become State property and the State must maintain them; noted
<br />the School District was contacted several years ago regarding the outlots,
<br />but took no action. Motion was made by Sather, seconded by Peck, that
<br />Council adopt Resolution No. 86-7, APPROVING CLASSIFICATION OF PARCELS
<br />OF TAX FORFEITED LAND AS NON-CONSERVATION LANDS AND AUTHORIZING THE SALE
<br />THEREOF. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Donation - Picnic Shelter at Hazelnut Park, Aid Association for Lutherans
<br />Council was referred to Parks and Recreation Committee minutes, (1/25/86)
<br />explaining that the Aid Association for Lutherans would like to donate
<br />$2,500 for erection of a picnic shelter at Hazelnut Park. Arden Hills
<br />would provide the concrete slab on which it would be erected, at a cost
<br />of $1,000, and agree to maintain the shelter after its installation.
<br />Motion was made by Hicks, seconded by Hansen, that Council accept the
<br />$2,500 donation from the Aid Association for Lutherans, to install the
<br />picnic shelter at Hazelnut Park and authorize the Mayor to execute the
<br />Memorandum of Agreement, and authorize the Parks Department to spend
<br />$1,000 for shelter base. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
<br />
|