My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC MINUTES 11231976
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1976
>
CC MINUTES 11231976
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/20/2015 2:37:03 PM
Creation date
1/19/2015 2:30:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
11/23/1976
Meeting Type
Regular
Document Type
Council Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
Apache managerent. Deputy Chief_ Hickerson felt the unsupervised <br />games in the mall area attracked an undesirable element from both <br />the City and Minneapolis and said he believed the nroblem would be <br />alleviated by restricting the activities to one sunervised center. <br />There was then a discussion of whether such. restrictions would be <br />necessary for the two bowling alleys or the roller rinl� which is <br />anticipated to begin operating in the City because of the supervi- <br />sion which is inherent to such operations. Consideration was also <br />given to whether a differentiation should be made between electronic <br />games and the rides for vounger children as well. as for pool tables <br />which are provided for under separate ordinance. <br />Motion by Councilman Stauffer and seconded by Councilran Sauer to <br />table action on Ordinance 1976-014 until the Pecerber 7th Council <br />meeting during_ which time the P4anager. Attorney ane Police Depart- <br />ment can work, on the suggested revisions. <br />ORDINANCE 1976 - 014 <br />API ORDIPIANCF RECULATIPIr AMUSEMENT DFVICFS <br />F.P,EPIDIP� . CFA.PTFP I17 (Section 400) OF THE 1973 <br />CODE. OF ORDINPNCFS BY ADDING SFCTIOPT 450 TFFPrTO <br />Motion carried unanimously. <br />The City Rngineer then discussed the daraae done to three trees on <br />the City boulevard when the sidewalks were installed on the north <br />side of 29th Avenue, east of Silver Lake Roa.e. He said every <br />effort had been made to save these trees but there was a possibility <br />they had been so severely injured thev might not. survive. David <br />Freund, 3009 - 29th Avenue has reauested that the tree in front of <br />his house be provided with a retaining wall in effort to save it. <br />Motion by Councilman Sundland and seconded by Councilman Stauffer <br />to authorize the Maintenance Department to place ternorary retain- <br />ing walls around the trees on 29th Avenue which were injured with <br />the installation of the sieewalks until such time as it is ascertain- <br />ed whether those trees will survive. <br />Motion carried unanimously. <br />Mr. Comstock then answered questions which the Council had regarding <br />the engineering costs for reconstructing 29th Avenue, specifically <br />those dealing with the engineering firm's billing for inspection <br />and staking services. He said these costs, at 49 or less, were <br />less on a. percentage basis than were paid for the same services on <br />previous construction jobs such as the storm sewer and the water <br />irnroverent projects. Because of the many changes in the final <br />plans for the rebuilding of 29th, the job had been billed on an <br />hourly rather than the usual. Percentage basis. The Engineer also <br />said his firm had tried to establish ketter relations with the <br />residents of that street than had been done on previous projects. <br />Manv personal contacts had been made to assure the property owners <br />that the construction complied with the plans orginally agreed <br />upon and the engineering firm's representatives rade an attempt to <br />l get personal input fron the owners on the installation of the <br />driveways. Mr. Comstock then told the Council that there was some <br />dispute with the contractor as to whether some of the driveway cuts <br />will be considered additional. costs for the nroiect. These differ- <br />ences will be resolved if the contractor Presents then in a change <br />order. <br />(3) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.