My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Agenda and Packet 1994 02 15
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
AGENDAS & PACKETS (45.010)
>
1990-1999 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
1994 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
City Council Agenda and Packet 1994 02 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/3/2025 10:24:37 AM
Creation date
9/3/2025 10:03:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
2/15/1994
Doc Type
City Council Packet
Quality Check
9/3/2025
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
344
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Lovihn wondered, concerning the hearing mentioned in the first <br /> paragraph of Page Z, if there was a time Iran* for the hearing. He <br /> vat concerned that construction might be held up for a considerable <br /> amc-.Mt of tine. <br /> Griffiths assumed it Mould be handled quickly by the Planning <br /> Director with notice to the parties involved, not a public hearing. _ <br /> Le% ihn colt that there were a lot of "ifs" under part "D" of the <br /> OrO. inance . <br /> Howard moved that Council approve Resolution No. 1141, Series 1994, <br /> on let reading and set a public hearing 1/15/94. Seconded by Sisk. <br /> R011 call was taken. notion passed by a 6 - 0 vote with Lathrop �- <br /> being absent. <br /> OTMM REGULAR BUSI1 ZSS ITE1(8 AAISIXG AFTZR PRZPARATION OF AGENDA <br /> Howard stated that Councilman Lathrop asked him to ask Council <br /> about considering having 96th Street, at the railroad czoasinq, as <br /> = an undergrad* crossing. <br /> Ton Phare, Public Works Director, felt it needed a sore detailed m>R <br /> look to see if there aren't any "roadblocks" that might come up. <br /> The concept is to see if the roadway can yo underneath the railroad NEW <br /> in the vicinity of Coal Creek to avoid the expense of an overpass <br /> and deal with the restrictions on railroad crossings for safety <br /> reasons. <br /> a Howard explained that Lathrop wanted council to approve the monies <br /> necessary to perform that analysis. - <br /> Phare stated that they've estimated that the analysis of having the <br /> roadway underneath the railway and above the flood plain should <br /> coat under $5,000, which will come out of the Transportation <br /> Pla.nning that was already budgeted. <br /> NEW <br /> Davidson wasn't in favor of spending a lot of money on planning <br /> unless the planning would identify the funding sources. <br /> Roward moved that Council approve a Maximum of 55,000 to analyse <br /> the feasibility of building an underpass under the railroad track <br /> on 96th Street with the funding coming from the Transportation <br /> � Planning Lund. seconded by Mayer. 1111 in favor. <br /> Davidson called for any other items. <br /> Tor E <br /> �s <br /> CITY ,ATTORNEY'S REPORT <br /> an KOZ E se:e <br /> �.� . <br /> 40 4," -T" K,r" • �`• {� � . ti�T Y � �,., ��A �G. �:,. �. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.