My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1982-11-01
Charlottesville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1982
>
1982-11-01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2003 6:13:20 PM
Creation date
1/8/2003 6:12:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
11/1/1982
Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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).
View images
View plain text
1'42 <br /> <br />STAFF REPORT: <br />CONSTRUCTION OF <br />YORKTOWN DRIVE <br />SIDEWALK <br /> <br />STAFF REPORT: <br />RISK MANAGEMENT <br />PROGRAM <br /> <br />STAFF REPORT: <br />BUCK MOUNTAIN <br />RESERVOIR PROJECT <br /> <br />Council, recommending that the Milgraum proposal be accepted. <br /> <br /> On motion by Mrs. Gleason, seconded by Dr. Hall, Council voted to <br /> <br />accept the recommendation of the Development Group to negotiate the sale <br />of Central Place with' Zeonard and Sylvia Milgraum by the following vote. <br />Ayes: Mr. Buck, Mrs. Gleason, Dr. Gunter, Dr. Hall. Noes: None. Absent: <br />Mr. Conover. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix advised Council that the staff recommends that the <br />Yorktown sidewalk project not be constructed. He stated that the <br />property owners had been surveyed and no consensus in favor of building <br />'~he sidewalk had been found. <br /> <br /> Mrs. Gleason stated that this project would not take property <br /> <br /> involved, since it is all in the public right of way. She asked for a <br /> <br /> further investigation of the matter. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix stated that the staff would not proceed with the project <br /> <br /> unless Council so directed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck indicated a need to review the sidewalk priority list. He <br /> <br /> also suggested moving to the next project on the list. <br /> <br /> Mrs. Gleason suggested reevaluating the policy instead of skipping to <br /> <br /> the next project or toaD. ne that is easy. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck expressed frustration because so much time (six months) has <br /> <br /> been taken to come up with the present priority list. Mr. Buck requested <br /> a report (within the next two weeks) concerning the priority list, explaining <br /> what projects are left to be completed, what are the engineering problems <br /> and what existing repairs are needed. <br /> <br /> Council agreed to carry the matter over. <br /> <br /> Mayor Buck suggested coming back to this item after considering the <br /> <br /> next item on the agenda. <br /> <br /> Leigh B. Middleditch, Chairman of the Citizens Committee for City- <br /> <br /> County Cooperation, addressed Council, giving an overview of a report <br /> <br /> prepared by the COmmittee. <br /> <br /> Lane Kneedler, also a member of the Committee, commented on the <br /> <br /> report. Mr. Kneedler reported that the study group had found that the <br /> City and Coun~ty have been in agreement with respect to the choice of the <br /> Buck Mountain site as the best and most economical source of water avail- <br /> able to accommodate future needs and the desirability of acquiring as <br /> promptly as possible the land required for the future Buck Mountain site. <br /> Mr. Kneedler continued, stating that the disagreement between the City <br /> and County has centered on how to implement the philosophical concept in <br /> the Four Party Agreement that those who will use and directly benefit <br /> from water facilities should bear the costs and the equity of long-range <br /> financing arrangements which require City residents to pay what appears <br /> to be a disproportionate share of the costs for a project which will <br /> ultimately benefit more County than City residents. <br /> <br /> The Committee recommended an arrangement which involves a special <br /> <br /> surcharge for all future urban water users who connect to either the City <br /> or County Service Authority water distribution systems, and charging the <br /> remaining costs to water users. The report states than an increasing <br /> proportion of these users will be County residents and businesses over <br /> the 30-year period it will take to pay the debt incurred. The net result <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.