Laserfiche WebLink
y_�,T msiNms (Cont'd.): <br />�) 4. Eugene Mehner - Request for approval of in lieu payment <br />for imPr7vements. <br />City Manager explained Nr. Nehner's request was due to the <br />current freeway construction activity in this area nnd. <br />recommended approval. <br />CTI ON : <br />That the request of Eugene Eehner for in lieu <br />pay4ent for improvements be approved, but that <br />the sum is to be at least equal to the City <br />7ngineer's final estimate of the revised cost. <br />:.OTION: Clayton; S'0317' di'r.en; VOTE: Passed unanimously. <br />5. Fremont 'ills Development Co. - Drainage Deresit. <br />That this matter be referred. to Staff for further <br />study. <br />TOTION: Fowle; »CON'D: Aiken; voTF: Passed unanimously <br />6. St. Nicholas Parish - :appeal of Planning: Commission penial <br />far verhead tili ties. <br />Mr. Henry Chescoe, architect, was present to re -resent St. <br />Nicholas Parish. <br />It was learned from the discussion that the overhead line re- <br />quested will be of a temporary nature and that it is the <br />intention of the owners to Place all utilities underground <br />upon completion of the full development, which will include <br />achurch and priest's house. <br />These facts were never brought out at the planning Commission <br />hearing on June 28, 1965, at which time the application was <br />rejected. <br />Council was of the opinion that if ?:r. Chescoe were prepared <br />to submit a commitment that within a certain period of years <br />all overhead lines would be removed and placed underground, <br />the appeal could be favorably considered. Nr. Chescoe stateC,. <br />a practical commitment wouldbe whenever full development <br />occurs, since the completion date is not known. <br />