2000-10-16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

207 Mr. Toscano noted that two of Council's prioritles, economic development and transportation, show up relatively Iow in [mportance on the survey, though better jobs is rar~ked higher in comparison with the 1993 survey. Mr. Toscano suggested that it may be possible that the public does not know how economic development is defined and therefore does not know how to respond. Mr. Guterbock said he can provide the goal ranking for the 1993 survey, and also noted that when the economy is good, economic development moves down as a priority. Mr. Lynch said that those with lower education had better jobs as a high prior'ay, which suggests there should be more focus on GEDs, etc. Mr. Cox said he finds it interesting that education remains the most important service, which confirms the need to continue the level of support for schools.. Mr. Cox said the survey shows that the neighborhoods am much too homogeneous, in income levels, etc., and therefore there is a need for more diversity in housing stock. RESOLUTION/APPROPRIATION: NEIGHBORHOOD DRAINAGE PLAN I~. Tolbert explained that staff recommend that the Neighborhood Drainage policy be amended to affirm the original intent of the prograrr~ The purpose is to provide simple solutions to problems associated with street drainage and is intended to reduce/eliminate flood of structures. The scope of the program is to install curb and gutter, storm dminage~ sidewalks or pipe in public right-of--aray or easements adjacent to public right-of-way. The maximum cost of any project is $I5,000. Mr. Tolbert also recommended that the funds for Neighborhood Drainage be reduced from $940,000 to $240,000; City-Wide drainage be increased from $223,000 to $383,000; Traffic Calming be increased from $300,000 to $600,~0; and Sidewalks be increased from $300,000 to $540,000. Mr. Tolbert reviewed the traffic calming and sidewalk projects. Mr. Cox asked if Council could be provided with information on what the Park Street traffic calming will be. Mr. Cox said he is glad that the traffic calming projects are moving to more aesthetic things and away from four-way stop signs. Mr. Lynch asked if drainage projects on Locust are part of Neighborhood Drainage, and Mr. Tolbert said that Neighborhood Drainage projects are those that only affect individual or one or two properties. Mr.. Cox said he is not surprised that the Hartman's Mill Road project is expensive, and asked if different solutions are being explored. Mr. Tolbert said that traffic calming ~ being explored at the same time as other alternatives are being explored. Mr. Cox asked if the City is using Capital Improvement funds for the Hartman's Milt Road .project as well as CDBG funds~ and Mr. Tolbert said yes. Ms. Richards asked if drainage from school property queries for the program, and Mr, Gouldman said that just be~ause water runs off City property it does not automatically mean that the City is responsible. l~r. O'Connell said that. ~ City's legal responsibility is another factor in drainage projects. Mr. Cox made a motion to adopt the Neighborhood Drainage policy change as recommended by Mr. Tolbert, Mr. Lynch seconded the motion, and it was approved by the following vote. Ayes: Mr. Camvati, Mr. Cox, Mr; Lynch, Ms. Richards, Mr. Toscano. Noes: None. Abstaining: Mr. Toscano. On motion by Ms. Richards, seconded by Mr. Cox, the reappropriation of Neighborhood Drainage funds was offered and carried over to the next meeting for consideration.