09-06-2005 CC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . City Council Minutes September 6, 2005 6.8. 7.1. Page 7 PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINN. STAT. ~ 117.042 FOR THE COUNTY HIGHWAY 40 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. Consider "No Parking" Restrictions Along Proctor Avenue City Engineer Terry Maurer stated Sherburne County Public Works is requesting city concurrence with their plan to sign both sides of County Road 77 (proctor Avenue) ''No Parking" from CSAH 1 to the Salk Middle School driveway. He stated it is a danger for pedestrians crossing the busy county road to get to events at the school and it is also a site distance hazard for vehicles pulling onto Proctor Avenue from the nearby townhomes. Mr. Maurer stated there are no parking signs installed along the east side of Proctor Avenue but no one is sure of the history of why those signs were installed. Councilmember Dietz stated a majority of the parking issues happen when there are recreational activities at Salk. He questioned what alternative parking would be available for people attending these activities. Councilmember Dietz stated he had no issue with signing the west side of Proctor with no parking signs but would like to see alternative parking options available. It was suggested that the east side could be open for parking and the west side signed for no parking. The Council directed Parks and Recreation Director Bill Maertz to work with the county and the school district on finding alternative parking options for people attending recreational activities at the school. Discuss Council Worksession Agendas City Administrator Pat Klaers reviewed the tentative worksession agendas for September and October. Mayor Klinzing added an exit interview of Building and Environmental Administrator Stephen Rohlf. Councilmember Dietz stated the Utilities Commission is unclear on what the Council direction is for the joint meeting scheduled October 10, 2005 with all the Boards/Commissions. He requested more feedback to take back to the Utilities Commission. He further stated that the Utilities Commission does not have some of the same latitude in decision making as other Boards/Commissions and questioned if they needed to attend the joint meeting. Mr. Klaers stated staff met to discuss the joint meeting and also had some questions regarding the joint meeting. He stated the Boards/Commissions would like feedback and direction from Council. He stated staff questioned what the purpose of the meeting would be and had the following questions: . Would it be to discuss specific issues? (Example: development) Are all Boards/Commissions needed? (Also don't want any of them to feel left out.) Should a facilitator be brought in? Are Boards/Commissions true advocates for their cause; are they following direction from the City Council; or a combination of both? . . .