My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1987-04-14
NewBrighton
>
Council
>
Minutes - City Council
>
Minutes 1987
>
1987-04-14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2005 6:08:32 AM
Creation date
8/10/2005 2:43:41 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
<br />1 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />April 14~ 1987 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />At this point, without having any specifics, Locke suggested <br />council direct staff to go ahead with preparing orders to comply <br />with the original orders for action at the next council meeting. <br /> <br />Beisswenger stated his new building is on next week's Planning <br />Commission agenda; but would like to explore leasing space down- <br />town and knows that would not be completed in thirty days. <br /> <br />Williams asked if between now and when the item comes back to <br />council, a list be made of what can be done practically; because, <br />regardless of the outcome, it will take awhile until a new build- <br />ing is built. <br /> <br />Schmidt stated Items 9, 10, and 11 could be completed within 30 <br />days, recognizing that some are in the process of being taken care <br />of already. Schmidt further stated that before the 60-120 day <br />deadlines, council should know whether or not a project is going <br />in across the street from city hall; and whether or not Beisswen- <br />ger Hardware will be building a new building on their site. <br /> <br />Brandt asked if there is any information available as to the cost <br />and difficulty of bringing matters into compliance; asked if Locke <br />could come to the next council meeting with an indication of what <br />would be involved to accomplish each item. <br /> <br />Locke indicated the timing indicated is based on the relative <br />seriousness and difficulty for correcting the problems; does not <br />believe the city is in a position to be concerned about the own- <br />er's cost to bring the building up to code. <br /> <br />Gunderman expressed concern that the city not get involved in <br />cost, but rather be concerned about safety. <br /> <br />Schmidt stated a time period has been established and each one <br />must be followed; however, to the extent that there might be a new <br />building on the site or a commitment to lease downtown, there <br />might be a stay in the proceedings (with regard to the electrical <br />and other major cost items) if plans have been approved within <br />that 60 day period. <br /> <br />Benke is willing to adopt the staff recommendation and have a re- <br />port back on May 12, 1987, by which time we should have more in- <br />formation on the downtown development. <br /> <br />Brandt would like to see faster action orr the three items identi- <br />fied by Schmidt. <br /> <br />Gunderman would encourage council to let staff and the owner work <br />out a schedule of what is appropriate. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.