1989-03-06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

284 Mr. Eugene Williams of 620 Ridge Street and General Manager of Dogwood.Housing, stated that he was concerned that he had~-no% been notified oS the proposal to pave the alley even though Dogwood Housing owns~two properties adjoining the alley. Mr. Williams stated that though on the surface paving the atleyappeared to be a good idea, many other alleys need to be open-end-and he felt the City should study the matter further~and establish regulations before proceeding. Mr. Williams ~stated that questions remained concerning maintenance of the alley, lights, trash collection and litter. Mr. Blake Caravati, a member of the CDBG Task Force, read a letter from residents of the neighborhood in support of paving the alley. Mr. Caravati stated that he felt trash and litter in. the alley would be helped by the paving and he felt the special request should be granted because it is a low income neighborhood. Mr. Buck stated that there are many alleys similar to this one throughout the-City-and while it may be sensible and wise ~ope~ some of them, it should be done as part of a City plan with the understanding that it would be an~ expensive program. Mr. Buck noted that paving alleys has only been done ~in special situations because ~of traffic or parking changes. Mr. Buck stated that if not done as a City-wide plan then it should at, least be done as partof a coordinated neighborhood plan. Mr. Buck stressed that it would be difficult to deny similar requests in the future if approved at this time.~ ~Mr-~ Vandever stated that CDB~ funds were special funds specifically~argeted f~r~ neighborhoods that qualify which makes them different~from other drainage or sidewalk funds. Mr. Vandever stated that while he did not feel it was a clear cut issue, he relied on the neighborhood to tell Council what problems exist. Mr. Vandever stated that he felt~paving the alley would be a step in the right direction for improving the neighborhood. Rev. Edwards stated that it may be that the matter should be more coordinated, but felt paving the alley was justified because the area has historically been neglected and the neighborhood has a sense of what is needed. Rev. Edwards stated that.he felt this project deserves to be made an exception. Mr Buck stated that he felt it was a mistake to not subject CDBG funds to the same criteria and standards as other City funds as it can result.in a."shotgun" approach. .-~ Ms. Waters stated that she gives great weight to the fact that. the Task~Force has supported the proposal to-pave the alley-for~years andlshe, has no problem overriding City policy.to, address a.neglected neighborhood. 'Ms. Waters noted that she did not feel approVat of_the project would put the City-~on.the verge of setting a~policy of paVing alleys. Ms. Waters stressed that lights would not-be added to the alley by the City and trash, would not be~collected~from the alley. Ms. Waters ~oted concern that resources~would not be~ · available to residents to provide off-alley parking. Ms. Waters recommended that the City make very clear what it will do and.what it will not do for the neighborhood to ensure that the neighbors understand before making a final decision regarding~the alley. Ms. Waters stated that she would support the proposal with the understanding that the alley would only be surface treated and periodically maintained. The appropriation reallocating CDBG funds, with $20,000 allocated for surface treatment of the 10 1/2 Street alley, which~was offered at the February 21st meeting, was approved by the following vote. Ayes: Rev. Edwards, Mr. Vandever, Ms. Waters. Noes: Mr. Buck. Absent: