My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1995/07/10
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
Agenda Packets - 1995/07/10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:48:54 PM
Creation date
7/2/2018 9:32:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
7/10/1995
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
7/10/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
104
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
JUL-10-1995 17:12 FROM ST. MARY'S MNPLS. CENTER TO 7843462 P.01 <br /> FAX to City of Mounds View - 3462 <br /> FROM - Linka Holey, Director • institutional Research, Saint Mary's University - <br /> 874-9877 Ext. 112 <br /> July 9, 1995 <br /> TO: Members of the Mounds .ew City Council <br /> FR: Linka e , Resident an• •-st member of the Trailways Advisory Group <br /> ciwi <br /> and the Focus 2000 - H using and Neighborhood Task Force <br /> RE: Funding for Pedestrian Bri•ge across Highway 10 <br /> The concern over the division • our community by Highway 10 has been <br /> expressed since I moved into ounds View in 1976. Both the social and safety <br /> implications have been widely •iscussed in many public forums. The <br /> construction of a pedestrian bridge is a vital response to this long-standing <br /> problem. <br /> I was delighted to hear that the city had received a federal transportation grant <br /> with an unbelieveable match of 0/80 percent. As a former grant writer, I am <br /> well aware of theup front and b ckground work required to obtain such a deal. <br /> My respect for the city staff coninues to rise as I hear of this type of action on <br /> community-generated concern . <br /> 1 was totally shocked to hear th t the Council may not fund the 20% to secure <br /> the grant. I cannot comprehend why any Council member would vote against a <br /> highly public supported projectith such a positive return on investment. This <br /> project has support of all ages ithin the population. Is this support not <br /> understood by the Council? Ar there particular costs that make this project not <br /> as cost beneficial as one would expect? Even a 50/50 match would be good. <br /> I feel strongly that the Councilhould support this project. You can use this <br /> project to publicize your commi ment to addressing big probems like the <br /> division of a city by a major hig way. Your attention to cost by successfully <br /> competing for the 20/80 grant i also an example of your fiscally conservative <br /> management approach. You w the positive energy of a city brought together <br /> for the Festival in the Park toda . The parade, the activities, and the fireworks <br /> were grand! The investment in the symbolic and functional pedestrian bridge <br /> will bring you the same, if not n ore, public support as the annual festival has <br /> brought you today. 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.