CC PACKET 01241984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 -3- i . , Motion by Councilman 'Marks..-and seconded by Councilman- Ranallo. to. authorize staff to :write a letter to Columbia..Heigh.ts informing them of the Salvation Army' s refusal to participate, in the -Stinson. Project and- to- inquire whether that City:,.is still interested in the project. = Motion carried- unanimously.. , Although the Salvation- Army----!still recognizes their responsibility to pay all. the costs of the study doneafor Phase 1, Mr. Hamer indicated _ the. Camp officials have -requested-continuance of that payment until this' :spring, -at which time their :Property. Committee. would:make a -.final .,.assessment.._.of . the: problem and make a determination as- to whether- __..- or mot - they should proceed with the County Road E Project. The Public Works Director then indicated, that, even if the project proceeds, it may be some time before it becomes a reality since New Brighton hasn't even held- the required public hearings yet. Motion by Councilman Marks and seconded by Councilman Makowske to approve payment of $6 ,071. 81 to Short-Elliott-Iiendrickson, Inc. . for the.:feasibility and cost- stud=y they made on the project proposed to _-... correct the drainage erosion -problem. along County Road E. Motion .carried unanimously. In his February 3rd memorandum, Mr::. Childs- had given the historical background of the_ -City! s termination 'in 1983 of the highly appreciated, • _ .b-ut_�very expensive . ,annual_-_branch chipping prof-e.ct_.for, which the - Council had subsequently directed the staff to explore alternatives for reinstating in. 1984 , giving .consideration to users fees as a -, primary- financing- .method-. _ The.'Manager. had-. proposed four- 'alternatives including- their -costs and what he perceives are the weaknesses and strong points of each and h'ad---suggested- criteria -under which'-the- staff could recommend undertaking the service. There was general. support...for Alternative #3 which would- provide the -chipp-ing service on a. cost recovery basis but Councilmen Ranallo and Enrooth seemed to favor running the program this year under ,op.tion -- "B" for- that proposal which would charge a- flat rate of $20 per stop, which would. prevent. disputes between- the residents and. City crews who would serve as the "timekeepers" , rather than option "A" under which a resident would_ be b.illed... $15 for the first 10 ..minutes_..of..chipp fig...._. and an additional $15 for every 10 minute-s- thereafter, to avoid Obten- tial problems, with-..neighbors pooling their branches . The following . motion wa"s- made when it became apparent that the majority favored the "A" approach.-' Motion by • Councilman Marks and seconded by Councilman Enrooth to rein- state" the branch- chipping program .in St. Anthony in 1984, under Alter- native- 3A proposed by the Manager ,in the February 14 , .1984- Council agenda. - Moton��earried-:unanimou9ay- �.�:>• �+-� r.': ;. .