Minutes 1997 1020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

- of course, as long as it is related somehow to what we originally asked for. I think that traffic mitigation goes a little bit beyond what we asked for originally. We never commented on traffic. We just said "make our street whole - if you're gonna dig it up make it whole. Put it back the way it was. " So..... Council Member Glaze: And then that goes right back to the point to where I was and that is that the landscaping, and this has been repeated a couple of times by Councilmembers, is I don't care what the Councilmembers did before, this is a new Council -this is today. Is, that when we talk about making it beautiful afterwards is beyond the point. We're talking about the impacts of construction on that street. And if we are not going to mitigate that, I'm not in favor of it. You know - I say fine -let it go away, you know. I'm the Councilman today - I'm not the Council Member four years ago or five years ago - is it, to me, it is as important, not just to plant trees along that street, but to mitigate the construction and traffic impacts that are going to be caused by this. And it not only impacts the City streets for traffic, it impacts schools, pedestrian flow, the whole bit. I think that as part of this project, it has to be negotiated out. If we say that traffic is beyond the scope of what we negotiated in the past, and this is the result of what we negotiated in the past, I'm not in favor of it. It's as simple as that. Bob Taylor: I think one point we can make on that is, many of the things that you are talking about would be part of the encroachment permit. It would require a traffic circulation plan, a detour plan. There would be a requirement that they can only open so many feet of trench at a particular time - it may be that we would require them to take Qctober 20, 1997 -Verbatim Transcript, Item 6.A 15