My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCMin_86Aug13
FalconHeights
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
198x
>
1986
>
CCMin_86Aug13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2009 8:39:30 AM
Creation date
6/23/2009 10:37:58 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
MINUTES <br />REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />AUGUST 13, 1986 <br />A regular meeting of the Falcon Heights City Council was called to order <br />at 7:00 P.M. by Ciernia <br />~I <br />PRESENT <br />Ciernia, Hard, Chenoweth and Wallin. Also present were Barnes, Schroeder <br />and Schunicht <br />ABSENT <br />Baldwin. <br />CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED <br />Hard moved, seconded by Wallin, approval of the Consent Agenda. Motion <br />carried unanimously. <br />MINUTES OF JULY 23, 1986 APPROVED <br />Hard moved, seconded by Chenoweth, approval of the Minutes of July 23, <br />1986. Motion carried unanimously. <br />RAMSEY COUNTY ENGINEER TO BE ASKED TO ATTEND HAMLINE ASSESSMENT HEARING <br />Schunicht recommended that Council have the Ramsey County Engineer in <br />attendance at the Hamline Avenue Assessment Hearing since the project is <br />under the jurisdiction of the County and he would have first hand <br />knowledge on any questions relating to construction. Council concurred, <br />and Schunicht will make the arrangements. <br />HAMLINE SIDEWALK WILL NOT BE EXTENDED TO LARPENTEUR <br />TIM HENDERSON, 1341 W IDAHO, stated he was a new resident and was shocked <br />to learn there was to be an assessment against his property for Hamline <br />Avenue improvements and was opposed to a sidewalk being constructed in <br />conjunction with the street project. He felt the sidewalk was totally <br />unnecessary. <br />Ciernia explained that the matter arose when the area between Idaho and <br />Iowa were polled in response to a request to remove the section of <br />sidewalk in that area, and many of those residents indicated they objected <br />to removal and would like to see the walk extended to Larpenteur Avenue. <br />MARVIN DEMARTINO, 1345 W. CALIFORNIA, questioned the installation of a <br />sidewalk which would be three different dimensions, 4 feet to 7 feet to 8 <br />feet, why the sidewalk would end at the California alley forcing <br />pedestrians to walk through the service station drive, felt the walk was <br />unnecessary and was opposed to it. Schunicht explained the sidewalk width <br />must vary due to the widening of Hamline Avenue in some areas, and the <br />walk was not extended through the service station drive as most of the <br />drive is concrete. <br />Mr. Henderson and Schunicht will discuss the possibility of placing a <br />retaining wall along the Henderson property. <br />Following a discussion Wallin moved, seconded by Chenoweth, that the <br />sidewalk not be extended. Motion carried unanimously. <br />6 ~. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.