BOOK 23_1950-05-15 to 1952-04-21

Browse Search

rrn ,vhich Ins :i• i 174 ETS. Councilman Janes stated his understanding o,. the matter bu i 1 pI,L NIGHT PARKING AND TRUCKS OPF CITY S �Ft• tb0. i 11• the last meeting was not to leave the enforcement of the ordinance the intention of Depart¢e r J discussed at cases. Chief Vtood exp 12. 4 or emergency their own judgement as to hardship allow emergency eases to apply, such as ear ' � i i �, nod been doing: namely, was to enforce the ordinance as they was to grant permission to park overnight he,, Royer stated his understanding { , breakdowns etc • Councilman RoY reeable to temporary permits Feeing issued t i 1 no garages were available. Councilman Herkner stated he was or hardship cases. It was decided to bring this subject up for further take care of so ca3led emergency Council in the meantime to give the matter D 1 of October 2nd, the au -1 j alar meeting j discussion at the next reg Is th {{ y Chief YYaod has some data which he has obtained from other cities which will be available i V further stud a' i to the members of the Council' v r PROJECT. Attorney Wagstaff addressed the msetinb A i FURTHER DISGUSSTON AND HEARING ON BF.OAT)ViA_-MARSHALL T'`lP��r . p�• „ � the activities of the Committee to date. He stated they still � P i and submitted a copy of a report covering es although City Engineer Jain had worked out s ample figures on certain P would like to have more cost Elgar ' majority report, however, HFr• Guido representing the } lots. The report as rendered did represent the maJ y n prepared a statement co of which was Genoehio interests did not concur. Mr. Guido stated that he had p stating their ideas. He stated that they proposed a different approach, rather handed to each councilman, Guido stated further that due to present condtions it would !' �' than the ultimate aims of the committee. 11r• G '''', F the property at this time due to shortage of materials, etc., and he advocated „• not be ossible to develop V C. Black, representative of the National Motor Bearing Go., postponement of the entire project. Fdr• lY• 1 ..q stated that the majority of the committee stxil favored improvements, that necessary improvements should ga ' r items should be eliminated, that the district should be enlarged in same casesazF through, that unnecessary the expense spread over more territory. In answer Councilman Jones question as to their w511ongnesstoga through with the project along the lines of their report in case the C^until agreed with the suggested ►./ } changes, bir• Black replied that the majority were vrilling to go along. COINUTITTE REPORT ON BROADPtAY-MARSHALL ASSESSMENT DTSTRTCT September 251 1950- 1. Bridge. This is of benefit to the whole city, not the assessment district, and therefore should be uilt y the City. d be aid by the by ,.l y, es shoal F 2: pump. Main arterial lines and pump eshould be district prodratatby area. itmay benecessaryto expand the a P property owners within the drainage district to take in the whole drainage area. 3• Sidewalks. Not needed at the present time and can be put in by the property owners when their propertp is being improved. ii '.;!�. Electroliess. Not needed at the present time and should be eliminated, S. Alley Behind iiroadway. No paving and no water improvements between Broadway and Bay Road. x y { n for installation 6. lVater Obligation of City to install, but could be financed by property owners PThis gcould be done out + r; }�•`' and7eing reimbursed by the City over a 15 -year period, the same as the bonds. I, of the profits derived. i! 7• Storm Sewers. These should be pro rated over drainage district by area. Provision for those whoha� already put in adequate storm sewers should be made. Distinction should be made between naturalwats channels and new drainage ditches, the latter of which should be paid by the owners within the whole drainage district. ert owners Sewers, Street Paving, Curbs & Uutters. Normal requirements to be paid by adjoining RroA yefinitv^s ° 4` i if the improvement is needed. Everything over normal requirements to be paid by the Ga-ty' D ii tl 'i?+ i of normal paving --6n crushed rock compacted and 2« asphaltic concrete wearing surface• i" 9. Marshall Street. On Marshall between Maple and Chestnut resent plans provide for the condemning os f k of an extra 20 feet on the south side. At resent there} s dedicated a 60 foot street and the execs 20 feet should be charged to the Cit if the desire an 80 foot street. Also at present there t g Y Y 50 foot strip on which there is an easement for parking. The committee recommends that the e yThe z i} 1, resolution and by re -zoning, abandon whatever rights it may now possess to this 50 foot strip set # severance of this strip might involve severance damages. If 80 foot street is planned on 1 of Maple to Jefferson, the cost of the additional 20gfset. the paving of it, and the cost of the uisition of the 20 feet should be aid b the City. i q P Y y o�'ers dedicated by the {p ! 10, Acquisition Costs. Only actual value of property should be »aid, or the property. cin to with some consideration being given for this. This would not 1 to Marshall Street betweeni eraat g g� PAY wire diff -and Jefferson, provided for in paragraph 91 and in those cases where special features req �• 3 EEE e 11 e; nd ; lib ,m,11 affee rope rape Pr• war a subst BRIM the m and M isal they LAND Se—51 propel that 1 a pie( you av owner( positi quisit on Brc PATER a iYa et No par It is and he area n pay fo owners gation contin SEVER or t fact p platin WLE is a date b• to be SIDE17A walk as and i!apie) Broadvi decisi save ing the in