Laserfiche WebLink
M~INU'IT' i <br />Ci.ty Coi.mci.l. <br />Feb. 23, 19£;3 <br />Si~;n Ordi.n~nce Mr. I'aliey st:ated t:hat in Chc~ Lietl~ Canada ~1al.l presenCation he would <br />(Cont.) l.il:e two~issues addr.essed. The f.i.r.st is 11o~a the amendment: w~i11 fi.t into <br />the Littl.e Canada P4all's overa7.l. signage in terms of square £ootag.,e <br />of si.gns and liow t:hey compare to other merchanCS. 'Che second i.s hoca <br />the pyl.ons w_i.ll. compare i.n si.ze w~i.th Che others on Rice Stceet. <br />Mr. Porsl~er.g :introduced the f.o1.l.os~ri.ng resolut~ion and moved ~(ts adopt:ion: <br />P:RSOI.U'.CT.OTI ~t0. 53--7_-89 - TAPLING 9C'PION 0:~ <br />"C1-lli PRO7?OS??D t1rQi~ID?^.1:N'C 'CO TI-IF, SIGN ORDI~ANCF? <br />PF3AI.,ING idITil TIiMPORARY i7.GNS <br />The f.orego~ing resoluti.on was duty secondec( by Mrs. Narcli.n~i.. <br />Ayes (5) Porsb~rg, Nardini, I~Ian;on, Pahey, Scal.ze. <br />Nayes (0). <br />Rc~tsol.uti.on declared adopted. <br />'fhi_, r.e,oluti.on appears i.n Resol.uY.:i.on Book No. 9, Pa~e 9£3. <br />'CraLlic The C:ity Cl.erk reporCecl Chat ,in the meet~i.ng wiLh MN DOT Lhe cost: <br />Signal At o£.atemporary signal at Rice and Mi.nnesot;a was~ figurecl at $60,000. <br />R~ice ~nd Of. Che cost $30,000 ~oas est~i.rnat=ed for. muter. i.als wh~ich the State <br />T4i.nnesota wi.11. provi.de and 530,000 Eor i.nstal.Lati.on. Pir. Chl.ebeclc i.nformed <br /> tl~e ai.idi.ence Chat ehe C1.t:y of I,ittl.e Canada was asl.ced to provi.de <br />Non-Agenda $10,000 t.avar.ds the instEil.lat~i.on, however, the City w1s n oC a~,recable <br />Iterti NO. 1 Co t1_'~~.is. <br />'Ckie Cierk re.ported that the C:iCy Auditor reporCecl tl~iat i.f the <br />businesses petit~ioned Co the City to assess the inst:allation costs <br />and wa~ive thei.r rights to challenge the assecsment, this could be <br />done. <br />Nfr. Chlebeck i.nf:ormed the Council <br />a ca11 f:rom M~1 DOT and they woul.d <br />C;.t] on this subject if: the Ci.t:y <br />'Chey also lndicated th2t the ci.ey <br />si.;;nal.. <br />that th:i.s afternoon he rece:i.ved <br />1.~ke Co mc~et agai.n w:i.th the <br />i.s the agerrt for the projecC. <br />s}.zould draw the plans Eor the <br />;9r. Newman stated Chat the State ~indi.cated Chat i.s rare where they <br />have, seen an instance ~~here privaCe partics h;~.ve voluntFered to <br />spend money f.or n publ.i.c Eacili.t_y. Mr.. Newman suggested thait tP~e <br />Ci.t~ assess Lhe cost i.f the business peo~le are co:i.ll:Ln~; to paq <br />i_t. <br />Mr. Porsb4rg stated that kie was not opposed to the temporar.y si~;n, <br />only t.o the Ci.ty's having to piclc u~> $10,000 ot the cost. <br />'Che Cleric report:ed that the money for Che project coul.d come £rom <br />the Ri_ce Street ConsCruction 7?und. 'Lhe Ci.ty k~as ovexbonded for <br />that project. PQrs. Scalze did not fee1. tkiat this money should <br />be used, but shoul.d be returned. <br />Page -19- <br />