Laserfiche WebLink
<br />22 <br /> <br />TUCS DAY <br /> <br />UJ\.Y 8, 1956 <br /> <br />sorr;e conflict betwee11 the Surge Estate's plans Or,)TODOSeu procedure and the City's <br /> <br />S'~lbdivision Orclil12.ncG. With reforence t.'lereto, C01J.l1c:.l received the following <br /> <br />memorimdum thrOUGh City "i::na:'er :.:athewson fro;n';iater-Street :iivision Jirector GeorGe <br /> <br />d. Dro'im, Council concurring in the reco::rrlencia~ions therein: <br /> <br />r aD attachil1'; heror::Lth a letter dated Fe'orllary 23, ES6 directed to ?/Ir. John <br />Floyd fro:'-l - it.... =~"';l~n'-: R.. ]...~CGl10(;, 3GC1~et.a.I~:/ of '::'118 COTfl.rrCi_ssion and a <br />BOp s>owin(' tho locate.on of th~.s property. <br /> <br />Tl:lj_s letter nc:r-::,ains .~,o a subdivision of the E. F. :;-ur~;o Estate property <br />locatect alonG ".~noriD,:L Doulc;varcl between 1?ridge S,:,rect Dnd Lavinder Street. <br />I~'1 this le tter, it Tras pointed Ollt to 1lr.. r'lo:rd .c,112.-G -0118 Planning Cornnliss ion <br />had voted to [';rani:, the Burge Estate conditional aDlJrov2.1 of their subdivision, <br />the conditions be:i-nr: that the Burge E3tate '!JOulcl deposit vlith the City an <br />2JIlOunt to cover -:Ale estir:1ccc,od cost of construcG:'-;l.~: c-:.J..l~b and ;;utter for the <br />entire lenGth of their subdivision on both sides of ~':emorial Boulevarci and <br />elso deposit tho necessary COi3t for the i:1stallat:Lon of tho base stone far <br />a six-foot widoninr: strip. <br /> <br />:!fr. BUTc;e is VCl''Y a"?Ldous to obtain final approval of this subdivision in <br />order that he can begin selling lots in the s1J.bdivision. <br /> <br />1':I.-r. Burge desires t,o ~)ut up a bond to cover the cost of construction rather <br />than deposit money with the City in order to obt<".in fitlal approval. I informed <br />~1:Lm that, based on previous actions of Council in :>:,o~;ard to similar situations, <br />I felt that Council would require that the actual cash be deposited '.'lith the <br />City rather than a bond to cover the cost of t!1ose required inprCJvel:!ents, hu.v- <br />ever, I told hi:Tl that Tie \'roulcJ present it to Cour:cil i'or vrhatever action they <br />s a.w fit to take in regctrd to th :Ls matter. <br /> <br />lhanlc you vOY7f ':TJ.ch. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry f:>:>om I.:r .J!. ? Smith, LJrbcU1 :Gnr;ineer for the State Eichway <br /> <br />Departr:18nt, and upon City Lana:;cr l\lathewson's recom.l:1cl"ldat:Lor:, Council agreed to <br /> <br />aSSillIle fifty per cent (50;6) of the estimated tote'll cost of :-;ll,SOO.OO for p12.ns for <br /> <br />widening J:Iemorial Boulevard to a f01Jr-lane hir;hway from Fayette Strec.,t north to the <br /> <br />City's corporate limits upon the conditions that 82l'ly const,ruction of the project <br /> <br />Ls assured and ?artj.cipa'c'ion in the cost of same l"iill 'GO the so.me as in the other <br /> <br />Liemorial Boulevard com'Lr1J.ctj.on projects. <br />