My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2005-09-14 CC
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
2005-09-14 CC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2006 2:39:11 PM
Creation date
1/11/2006 9:08:07 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
City of Centerville <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />September 14, 2005 <br />4. Resolution #04-043 – Assigning Duties as They Relate to Handling Banking <br />Transactions for the City of Centerville <br />City Administrator Larson explained that the Resolution would authorize the Finance <br />Director to move money around to different accounts within Main Street bank for <br />investment purposes but not allow money to be moved outside of the bank. <br />Motion by Council Member Lee, seconded by Council Member Terway to approve <br />Resolution #04-043 as presented. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. <br />VIII. OLD BUSINESS <br />1. Review Draft of Memorandum of Understanding on CSAH 14 <br />City Administrator Larson and Council discussed the County’s response to the draft <br />MOU and Council agreed Members are not ready to sign at this time. <br />Mayor Capra indicated that she does not agree that the City should pay more due to <br />increased costs through the County park. <br /> 2. Dock/Bridges – Drainage Utility Easements <br />Bob Dolfay of 1937 Eagle Trail indicated they have a bridge extending over an easement <br />and asked Council to consider allowing them to keep it there as that is the only access to <br />the back of his property for maintenance. <br />City Attorney Hoeft provided an overview for Council on the liability issue and said he <br />feels the bridge is different as it does not provide access to the water but to go over and <br />provide access to the back piece of property so it is not as much of a concern as the docks <br />would be. He then said that the City’s policy and, possibly, the Ordinance would need to <br />be changed to allow the bridge to remain as it is currently the policy that no structures are <br />allowed in easements. <br />Mayor Capra asked that the building official work on this Ordinance. <br />City Attorney Hoeft requested that the property owner be required to obtain insurance <br />coverage naming the City as an additional insured. <br />Council Member Paar indicated that he did some research and does not think that docks <br />and bridges would be covered under a normal home owner’s umbrella policy. <br />Council agreed to consider allowing bridges provided that there are standards established <br />and that insurance naming the City as an additional insured is provided. <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated he would discourage allowing decorative bridges in <br />easements but allow functional bridges that aid in maintenance. He then noted that the <br />Page 4 of 10 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.