Laserfiche WebLink
Reoular Council Meeting <br /> June 25, 1991 <br /> ? pave 6 • <br /> r <br /> 4 <br /> 5 resentative. A topic of discussion was how the cities could be better <br /> -, served by the federal government when so many cities are experiencing <br /> R problems on the local level . <br /> 109 <br /> Councilmember Enrooth noted that the minutes from the recent meeting <br /> 11 of the Recycling Committee had many interesting suggestions regarding <br /> 12 better control at the Recycling Center. One torment felt a fence and <br /> 13 a gate should be considered. The gate would prohibit entering the Center <br /> i4 except by foot rather than-allowing vehicles to come in. Also mentioned <br /> i5 was the need to clean up the area as it resembles a junk yard. "Junk <br /> 16 attracts junk." Members of the Committee are pursuing the costs which <br /> 17 would be associated with the installation of fencing. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 Report of Councilmember Marks <br /> 20 Councilmember Marks had nothing to report at this time. <br /> 21 <br /> 22 Report of Mayor Rana'. lo <br /> 23 Mayor Ranallo advised there is a meeting scheduled for June 26th at <br /> 24 the Shoreview City Hall . Participants in the meeting will be six or <br /> 5 seven cities in the area who will discuss joint cooperative ventures. <br /> 25 <br /> Two meetings have already been held where this matter was discussed. <br /> 27 The Mayor is unable to attend this meeting. Councilmember Marks advised <br /> 98 he will attend. • <br /> 29 The City Manager noted that a study had been done which stated that <br /> 30 forty percentof all governmental activities have been done with some <br /> 31 <br /> 32 joint cooperative. activities with other governmental agencies. <br /> 34 B. City Manager' s Report <br /> 35 1. Association of Metropolitan Municipalities <br /> 7 A letter was received from the AMM requesting elected officials and <br /> 37 <br /> city staff members to indicate their interest in serving on any of <br /> 9 the six AMM committees. During the reorganization of the AMM these <br /> 3 <br /> 30 committees have not been active. The City Manager requested that any- <br /> if <br /> 41 one who may be interested in serving indicate their interest to him <br /> 42 as soon as possible. <br /> A3 2. Potential Assessment Costs for Chandler Drive Improvements <br /> 44 A report- was received from Maier Stewart and Associates which addressed <br /> 46 the potential assessment costs for Chandler Drive improvements. Using <br /> 47 an estimated project cost of $178,267 and dividing the cost by the total <br /> 4B assessable feet of 3,452.22 the cost per assessable foot would be $51 .64. <br /> 9 The typical lot assessment would be 124.51 feet and a total of $6,429.70. <br /> 4 <br /> 4 0 The City Manager noted that most of the land is industrial . Happy' s owns <br /> • <br />