CC MINUTES 08101999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes August 10, 1999 • Page 3 1 2. First American Title Insurance Company in the amount of- 2 a. $125.00 per invoice dated July 21, 1999 for services relating to Kuharski 3 property at 2709 Pahl Avenue. 4 b. $125.00 per invoice dated July 21, 1999 for services relating to Tuohy 5 property at 2700 Pahl Avenue. 6 C. $125.00 per invoice dated July 21, 1999 for services relating to Tuohy 7 property at 2704 Pahl Avenue. 8 D. Legal Services/Prosecutions: 9 1. Dorsev& Whitney in the amount of: 10 a. $1,525.00 for legal services rendered through June 30, 1999 regarding 11 Harding Street Ponding Project. 12 b. $827.85 for legal services rendered through June 30, 1999 regarding City 13 of St. Anthony General Matters. 14 2. Foster. Wentzell. Hedback& Brever in the amount of$3,000.00 for legal services 15 rendered per invoice dated August 2, 1999. 16 E. Water Tower Park Project: 17 1. Arrigoni Brothers Company in the amount of$115,166.60 per invoice dated July 27, 1999 regarding Central Park and Water Tower Playground Improvements. 41 F. 3 pages of Verified Claims as presented by the Finance Director. 20 Motion carried unanimously. 21 VII. REPORTS. 22 A. Resolution 99-044, re: Feasibility Study for Year 2000 Street and Utilily Improvements 23 on 291 Avenue NE. 24 Marks, as Mayor Pro Tem, introduced Todd Hubmer, WSB, and invited him to address the 25 Council. Mr. Hubmer reviewed that discussions had been tabled on the feasibility study by the 26 Council to await the results of the public information hearing held on July 27, 1999. The intent 27 of the hearing was to gather information and input from the citizens regarding.the 29t1 Avenue 28 reconstruction. Issues were presented and discussed at the hearing, and Mr. Hubmer referred the 29 Council to his letter of July 30, 1999, which summarized the results. 30 31 Mr. Hubmer stated that the majority of residents had indicated a preference for reconstruction of 32 the entire street from Stinson Boulevard to County Road 88. The residents felt there was a need 33 for parking on 29th Avenue, but concerns had been raised at the hearing regarding the best side of 34 the street to implement parking. 35 Mr. Hubmer further stated that the majority of residents were opposed to sidewalks along 29th 6 Avenue and the residents had expressed significant concerns surrounding this issue. Residents had also expressed apprehension about widening the street section of 29th Avenue or reducing 38 chokers because speeds may be increased. Mr. Hubmer said the residents felt that additional