My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1983 12 06
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1983 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1983 12 06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:22 PM
Creation date
7/7/2009 2:55:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
12/6/1983
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1983 12 06
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
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
<br />12/6/83 <br /> <br />Page -5- <br /> <br />Drainage <br /> <br />The major concerns as far as the drainage, <br />felt that this was minor. The condition <br />that the City has required is to raise the <br />berms around the Church in the southern area <br />as well as on the eastern most area of the <br />buildings. In the southern area appoximately <br />2 ft. across those berms would require the <br />amount of drainage necessary. The drainage <br />pieces are already in place. It was his <br />understanding that it would stand the 50 year, <br />not the 100 year flood plan. Because of <br />the ground be frozen it was difficult to <br />surface that properly and prepare it for <br />sod. He felt that one of the most critical <br />items was the 5' piece of sidewalk which <br />was not complete. There was also a manhole <br />cover that was approximately l~ ft. above <br />where it should be. He had spoken with <br />the contractor and with council's permission, <br />to tent it and cement it. Felt this would <br />be acceptable to complete this if council <br />required it. <br /> <br />Mr. Wilcox stated that Inspector Ferris was <br />reluctant to give them permission for the <br />c.o. without council first having the op- <br />portunity to question what they were doing <br />and then to determine whether he can have <br />the right to issue the conditional c.o. <br />This was the request at this time. Would <br />be happy to address any of council's questi0ns. <br />Then stated that the door closurers are in <br />however the things that are not in are the <br />smoke screens,which are now available and <br />will be put in place permanently by the <br />time of the concert. This would be in the <br />gymnasium area as well as the chapel area, <br />and these were the only fire concerns within <br />the building. <br />conditional <br />Felt that by issuing a/certificate of occu- <br />pancy at this time would place liability <br />on the City and was aware that our Attorney <br />cringed at the mention of this. would like <br />to have something in writing releasing the <br />City from this liability. <br /> <br />Sidewalk and Manhole <br /> <br />Councilman Fauson <br />Liability <br /> <br />Councilman Cussen <br /> <br />Commented that a fair amount of time had <br />elapsed for the requirements to be met. <br />However, if the door seals work, and the <br />smoke seals work, he would be willing to <br />give a temporary CO for December la, 16, and 17; <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.