Loading...
07/30/1962 - 00023586��� 1°B" to a "B+" house, A➢JOUANMENT: Motion by Sheridan to certify the books to the County and to close the meeting. Seconded by .Tohanson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted: Marvin�.rBrunsell� Secretary to the Council V /" � � � ���� , i� MAYOR�— T, E. Greig SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL - JULY 30, 1962 A special meeting of the City Council was called to order by Acting Mayor Nee at 8•25 P,M. Members Present Members Absent: Nee, Johanson, Wo1ke Greig, Sheridan LICENSE RENEWAL - 100 TWIN DRIVE-IN: � Mr. Nee explained that the license had been held up on the 100 Twin Drive-in becaus= of the nuisance that was bein.g created there, Mr. Wargo anfl Mr. Herringer were present, There was a discuss�on on the traffic egress and ingress, Mr. Wargo stated � that they would be glad to control traffic on the highway i,f the Crty would authorize them to do it, and they would also provide an entrance on Highway 4k100, if the State would allaw them to do this. Mr. Nee explained ehat according to Ordinance #42, the the burden of coming up with a solution to this problem belongs to the owners of the theater� and not the City. Mr. Kohlan read Section 4 of Ordinance No, 42, with reference to distmrbances and nuisances, and stated that the City has received complaints from people in the area about the sound carrying over to the homes, and that the speakers are left on al1 night in some cases, and sound can be heard at all hours of the morning. Mr. Kuhlan read Section 5 of Ordinance No. 42 with reference to Craffic control. There was further diseussion on the traffzc problem and means o£ correcting it. Mr. Nee stated that he would go along with a pxovisional granting of this license if an effort were made on the part of the Dxive-in owners to solve the problem. Mr. Wargo stated that he would�be glad to sit down with the Engzneer Qr City Manager to attempt to resolve this matter. Mr. Johanson stated that it is partially the City's pro6lem, and that perhaps the Chief of Police could come up with some suggestxon for traffic control. The City Manager stated that he would ba glad to meet with the owners of the theater, the State Highway Department, the Chief of Police and Citq Engineer. Mr. Wolke stated that the City should review the State�Highway Department plans for this area. This review might alleviate the traffic problem, but this would not solve Che noise problem, and the problem of drag racing in the theater, Mr. Wargo stated that the attendants had been instructed to turn down the volume cahen the ma�ority of cars leave the premises. Mr. Wolke stated that before the shows start, a11 the speakers are turned on loud, and this is ob�ectionable to the home owners in the area, and the City has received complaints caith reference to the noise and dust in connection with the drag strip racing or racing of cars up and down the theater ' property, Mr, Nee stated that rt is not up to the City to come up with a solution to the problem, but the offices of the City are available if they can Ue of any help. Mr. Kohlan suggested that some action be taken to set up a meeting within the next two weeks between the owners of the theater and the City, and the Highway Department. Mr. Wo1ke stated tha[ he would like to have the Council review the plaas of the State Highway Department for the Highway ��65 and Highway �k100 intersection, and asked the City Manager to contact the Highway Department. Motion by Wolke to grant the license foT the 100 Twin Drive-in on the conditional basis that the licensees take action to remove the ob�ections which have been noted. Seconded by Sohanson. IIpon a voice vote, there Ueing no nays, the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - STREETS 1962-2 PROJECT: � � � `? `..l � �'he City Manager read the notice of hearing, and stated that the estimated cost for street susfacing and asphalt curb would be $6,15 per foot, and street suxfacing with concrete curb and gutter would be $8.24 per foot. These are L-he prices where there is no storm sewer or other work involved in the pro�ect, The City Manager explained the construction of the types of streets which would be put in, and explained that a11 the petitions and the records have been checked a long way back to insure that in this project, all streets have been included which may have been omitted Prom some other pro�ect� or which were originally petitioned for and never put in, or which need to be put in for some other reason. Mr. Nee asked Mr, Brown, City Engineer, to explain the basic difference between concrete ccrb and gutter and asphalt curb construcCion. M,r. Brown stated that there is no side pavement support when asphalt curb is used, whereas� with the concrete curb and gutter, the street does have lateral supporC, and stated that the pavement with concrete curb and gutter would probably last about two or three times as long; and that the grade can be flatter with concrete curb than with asphalt curb and save on excavation costs; and that breakup due to frost action is materially reduced due to storm water being kept aoaay from pavement. The hearing on the streets was taken up one item at a time. 59; Way N.E. from Anna Avenue to East River Road: There was no one present to speak for or against this improvement that the developer of this area does not want the sYreet> Assessment Policy for P:o,7ecC - St. 1962-2; Mr. Brown stated The question was asked if the length of the assessment spread should not be determined before the people decide whether they want asphalt or concrete curbs. Mr. Johanson stated that if the asphalt street with concrete curb and gutter lasts Cwice as long, the cost should be spread over twice as long a period. Motion by Johanson that the assessment for asphalt street with asphalt curb in this pro�ect be spread over a five year period, and the assessment for the asphalt street with the concrete curb and gutter be spread over a ten year period, in a11 instances except where the developer is re- quired to pay for it on a one year basis. Motion seconded by Wo1ke. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Nee explained to the audience the action the Council had just taken. The Council then went to the matter of the petition presented relative to SSLh Avenue. Curb and Gutter Along 58th Avenue (Madison Street to West Moore Lake Drive): Motion 6y Wolke to receive the petition opposing installation of gutter on 58th Avenue Northeast and place it on file. Seconded by Johanson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Along Rivex Edge Way N.E, from East River Road along northerly east-west leg: A question was asked if the curb would be higher than the existing streets. Two property owners from River Edge Way were present, and stated that they have a waCer problem in their basements and if the curb would hold L-he water from draining onto the streets, they �vould have more of a problem. Mr. Wolke stated that he had been in this person's home, and they do have a water drainage problem, and suggested that this be checked out very thoroughly before the curh is put in. A quest�on was asked about lowering Che water main on R1ver Edge Way. Mr. Brown stated that Comstock and Davis, Inc. are in the process of preparing a change order so that the lowering of this water main can be added into another pro�ect. Mrs. Herrig, Lot 18 in River's Edge Addition, and Mrs. Day, Lots 14 and 15, River's Edge Addition were present, and inquired about Che type of curb that would be put in and the drainage. Mr. Donohue, Lot 8, B1ock 1, was present and stated that he favored concrete curb. Mr. LaBoe, Lot 7, Block 1, was in favor of concrete c�srb. Mr. Erickson, Lot 8, Block 2, stated that he was in favor of concrete curb. Anoeher question asked: Could the lowering of the water main and the sCreet surfacing be done at the same time? The owner of Lot 7, Block 2, River Edge Addition stated that he was in favor of concrete curb. Mr, Erickson, Lot 8, Block 2, asked if the street would go around the corner, Mr. Brown explained that all of the street that is not presently paved would be paved, and where the street would be torn up by the water main, it would be replaced according to the o1d specifications. Mx'. Wolke asked if this is not the time to put in a hot mix street if the people are willing to pay the difference between the old type of specifications and the new type of specifxcations. Mr. Al Haley, Lot 24, asked if the southerly 1eg of River Edge Addita,xnn was a permanent street. Mr. Brown stated that at the time this street was put in, it was put in according to the standards in effect at that time. The owner of Lot 3, stated that he wanted concrete curb. Mr. Erlock, Lot 4, staCed that he wanted concrete, the ow[ter of Lot 5, $lock 1, stated that he wanted concrete curb. Mr. $rown then showed on t6e blackboard, the portion of the street ln River Edge Addition that would be entirely new street, the portion that would be torn up by the water main� and the portion of the street that would not be put in at all unless the people wanted it. ��6 It was stated that it would probably be best to put in the whole street to the new specifications if the people are willing to pay the difference. Mr. Wolke suggested that the people on this street meet with the City Engineer and resolve this problem as to whether the whole street should be replaced or only a portion of 1t. Along Riverview Terrace from 62nd Way to the North Edge of Juli-Ann Plat and along A1den Way from 62nd Way to the North Edge of Juli-Ann P1at: Mr. Harris, 6210 Riverview Terrace, Lot 22, B1ock 3, said that he was in favor of concrete curb attd gutter. Mr. George Arnold, Lot 5, Block 2, stated that he caas in favor of concrete curb and gutter, and asked if something could be done about 62nd Way also, from East River Road to Riverview Terrace as it is in bad shape. Mrs. Johnson, who lives on 62nd Way, stated that �t should be paved, and her neighbors are here also, and a lot of water collects on Alden Way and 62nd, and 62nd Way should be paved first, before Alden Way. Mr. Brown stated that when the street is paved, the drainage from Alden Way will be taken care of and will drain onto 62nd Way. Mr. Wolke stated that there is no petition for 62nd Way, but that Alden Way could be put in and made to drain properly. The owner of Lot 3, B1ock 1, Suli-Ann Addition, stated that there is a low spot in the street and that he does not want curh and gutter at all. Mrs. Johnson stated that it doesn't matter to her whether concrete or asphalt curb 1s put in. Mr. Aaland, Lot 2, Block 2, stated that he would �ust as soon not see Alden Way paved at a11. Along Alden Way from 75th Way N.E, to the North Edge of Elwe11's Addition, A1ong 75th Way N.E, from Alden Way to East River Road, and Along Talmadge Lane�firom Talmadge Way to 75th Way N.E,; Mr. Shodin stated that he would agree to whatever the rest of the neighborhood wanted to do. Dennis Ditman, Lot 4, Slock 1, asked how the drainage from the river lots is going to be kept off from Alden Way. Mr. Brown explained the manner in which the constructlon would be completed. Mr. Anderson, Lot 5, stated that he would go along with the rest and ask for asphalt curb. Ralph Eggers, Lot 5, Block 3, stated that he would like asphalt, The owner of Lots 7 and 8, Bbock 3, and the owner of Lot 5� B1ock 2, stated that he would probably go along with asphalt curb. The owner of Lot 39, Mrs. Roland Anderson, was present and asked several questions about her property, the amount of her assessment, etc. Mr. Shodan stated that he ti�ould go along wrth an asphalt curb. The Council then went to 75th Avenue N.E, from Central Avenue to Stinson Boul Mrs. Conrad, who owns Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 129 was present and stated that she does not want 75th paved as it is part of her back yard, and she does not want a 30 by 165 foot strip of paving in her back yard. She had written several letters to the City tequesting payment for the acquisition of this right-of-way, and had not received any answer. Mr. Kohlan stated that he had withheld further action until the determination is made on Bacon Drzve, whether that cvi11 be going through or not. Mrs. Conrad stated that people are driving through on Bacon Drive at 40 to 50 miles per hour, and she wants something done about it. Starlite Boulevard from ersitv Avenue Service Sylvan Lane to Mercury Drive, J and Mercurv Drive from Starlite t �ard to Univ- Mr. Benson who owns Lot 4, stated that the whole group on his street would 11ke concrete curb and gutter, and would like to have the street lowered on the west end. Mr Brown stated that there is a limit on how much a s[reet can be lowered as there must be a certain amount of cover over the water 1ine. Frank LeBeaux, Lot 2, B1ock 7, stated that he wanted concrete curh and gutter and he wauld like to have the street graded in the meantime. Mr. Herrmann, Lot 2, B1ock 2, stated that he wanted concrete curb and gutter. The owner of Lot 2, Block 3, stated that he wanted concrete curb and gutter. Mr. Benson stated that h1s neighbor, Mr. Peterson, also wanted concrete curb and gutter, and in fact the whole block wants concrete curb and gutter. He also asked if the street sign could be put in at the end of the street. Satellite Lane from Mercury Drive to University Avenue and 3rd Street N,E, from Satellzte Drive to 180' North of Satellite Drive: No one appeared Por ox against these portzons of the improvement. 4th Street NeE_ from 59th Avenue to 60th Avenue• Mr. Dave Schubert, Lot 14, Block 2, Bennett Palmer Addit�on, stated that he has about $337.D0 in escrow, and in his purchase agreement, the street is supposed to be paved with no additional cost to the homeowner. He stated that most of the people in his block have been in the area for about 3 years, Mr. Kohlan asked what type of street did the developer agree to put in. The question was asked what is happening ' � ' � � � 227 to the storm sewer in the area. Mr. Annett, Lot 17, B1ock 2, stated that the two ad�oining streets, there is asphalt curb and asked if it would be possible to put in concrete curb in their street under the circumseances, Mr. Les Knutson stated that possibly the construction of this street was held up pending the installation of catch basins at the intersections. Mr. Annett stated L-hat he would like cincrete. Mr, Lovelien who ocans Lot 15, SLock 2, stated that he would like concrel-e, Mr. Schubert, Lot 14, Block 2, stated that he wanted asphalt. The owner of Lot 18, stated that he wanted concr�te. Mr. Morgan, Lot 13, B1ock 2, stated Chat he wanted asphalt. Mr. Ke11y, Lots 3, 4, and 5, and �ots 7, S, and 9, Block 13, Hyde Park Addition wanted asphalt. Mr. Pau1 Bakken, Lot 12, Block 2, stated that he wanted asphalt. Mr. Dorf, Lot 11, B1ock 2, wanted asphalt. The question was asked if a po11 of the neighborhood could be taken to see which the ma�ority of them wanted, Curb and Gutter - Monroe Street from 63rd Avenue N,E, to Bennett prive: A petition was presented relative to cuxb and gutter to Che City Council asking for the retraction of the petition requesting curb and gutter on Monroe Street from 63rd to Bennett Drive in the Donnay and Christie Additions. on Street from 63rd Avenue to the South to Cul-de-sac: Mr. Paasch, Lot 1, Block 9, Christie Addition stated thaC he could see no reason for putting in a street, Ashton Avenue from Mississippi Way to 64th Way and 64th Way N.E. From East River Road to Railroad Property Line; There was no one present to speak for or against this installation. 61z Way N,E, from East River Road to Railroad Property Line: Mr. Johanson stated that the City has on file a letter from Northern Pump in which they ob�ecC to putting the street in, and they own considerable properCy on this street, and therefore, see no xeason for putting it in. Sackson Street from Bennett Drive to Mississippi Street� No one agpeared for or against Chis portion of the imgrovement. 64th Avenue N.E. from University Avenue (T,H. �k47) to Sth Street: A letter from one of the properCy owners was presented asking that it not be put in, The Council decided that this portion of the improvement would not be put in. Jackson Street from Miss�ssippi Street to Kennaston Drive, 66Ch Avenue N.E, from Jackson StYeet to East of Jackson Street: Mr. Erickson sCated that he would just as soon have the P& H mix. He wanted blacktop curb, as this is what he has in his agreement to the people. Oakley Street from Mississippi Street to North of Mississippi Street: No one appeaxed for or against this port2on o� the improvement. Van Buren Street from 73rd A�enue N,E, to 76Yh Avenue N.E,z I Mr. Brown explained that there is some storm sewer work included with the street construction work in this area. No one appeaxed for or against this portion of the improvement, Sth Avenue N.E. from West of Van Buren Street to Ab1e Street: No one appeared for or against this portion of the improvement. 52nd Avenue £rom Tavlor Street to Buchanan Street: No one appeared for or against this portion of the improvement. Mr. Brown stated that the developer's engineer had been doing most of Che work so far on this pro�ect, and the develaper has not stated to date whether or not they want eo do the work themselves. Stinson Boulevard from Gardena Avenue to the North Line of Section 24 (one-half width): Mr. 7ohanson stated that this portion of the improvement proaect should be held up until the City pf Fridley, New Brighton, and Mounds View could get together on some type of an agreement so the whole street could be put in at once, 228 63th Avenue P7,E, from Trunk Highway i�65 to Channel Road; The City Manager stated that this street is a constant maintenance problem, as this street was torn up when water and sewer was put in and had not been replaced. The City C1erk stated that Robert Minder had been in during the day, and oh�ected to putting this street in. There was discussion as to who would be assessed for the street if it were put in. There was no one present for or against this portion of the improvement. Onandaga Street from Central Avenue to Hayes Street: Mr. Nagel stated that he did not think that Mr. Carlson would want a,curb in front of his hardware store on Onandaga Street. Mr. Johanson stated that Onandaga Stzeet should be paved only to Hayes Street until the storm sewer problem on Hayes Street is resolved. 75th Avenue NoE, from Central Avenue to Stinson Boulevaxd; Mrs. Conrad appeared earlier in the meeting on this portion of the improvement. No one else appeared for or against this portion of the improvement. The Council decided that iC should be delered�ifrom the pro�ect, Ruth Street from Libertv S om oad to East River Road; No one appeared for or against this portion of the improvement. The Council thought asphalt curb would be accepta�le for this portion, but requested the developer be contacted to determine his preference. 57z Avenue N,E. fzom 2nd Street North to 22 Street North: The City Clerk explained the proposed method of assessing this street, one fourth o£ the cost to the propertq to the south and three fourths of the cost to the property on the north, Street N.E. from East River Road to Anna Avenue; No one appeased for oi against [his portion of the improvement, The City Ertgineer st�ked that the developer requested asphalt curb. 58th Avenue N,E, from Madison Street to West Moore Lake Dxive and Monroe Street from 63rd Avenue N.E, to Bennett Drive - Curb and Gutter: The City Manager stated that the Council has received a petztion against this curb and gutter from a great number of people in the area, Fiver Edge Way along west 1eg an.d southerly east-west leg - Curb and Gutter; This item had been taken up earller in the meeting. Mr. Kohlan recommended that the resolution ordering the improvements not be passed until such time as there are iour Councilmen present at the meeting. Mr. Wolke moved to close the hearing on Street Improvement Pro�ect 1962-2. Seconded by Johanson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. The Council then reviewed the Street Pro�ects and the type of curbing which would tentatively be approved on each of them. The Engineer was requested to check with the developers, and xf they would go along with the concrete curb and gutter rather than the asphalt curb, it could be put in. The decisions were based on the order of pro�ects in the notice of hearing published July 19, 1962 and July 26, 1962. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ix 12 13 14 15 16 59� Way - Asphalt Curb R�ver Edge Way - Concrete Curb Riverview Terrace - Concrete Curb Alden Way from 62nd - Deleted A1den Way from 75th Way - Asphalt Curb 75th Way - Asphalt Curb Talmadge Lane - Deleted Starlite Boulevard - Asphalt Curb Jupiter Drive - Asphalt Curb Mercury Drive - Concrete Curb Satellite Lane - Asphalt Curb 3rd Street - Asphalt Curb 4th Street - Asphalt Curb Jackson Street - South of 63rd - Asphalt Curb Ashton Avenue - Asphalt Curb 64th Way - Asphalt Curb 1 i � � � � ��� 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25 . 26. 27. 28. 24. 30. 31. 32, 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 61z Way - Deleted Sackson Street - Asphalt Curb 64th Avenue = Deleted Jackson Street - Mississippi North - Asphalt 66th Avenue - Asphalt Curb Oakley Street - Asphalt Curb Van Buren SCreet - AsphalC Curb 75th Avenue - Asphalt Curb 52nd Avenue - Asphalt Curb Stinson Boulevard - Deleted 68th Avenue - Deleted Onandaga Street (No curb by hardware store) 75th Avenue - Deleted Ruth Street - Asphalt Curb Ruth Circle - Asphalt Curb �airmont Cixcle - Asphalt Gurb 57Z Avenue - Asphalt Curb Charles Street - Asphalt Curb 58th Avenue - Deleted Monroe Stzeet - Deleted Curb - Asphalt Curb River Edge Way South - Concrete Curb and Gutter to be worked out with property owners by the City Engineer. The City Manager was instructed to ka ve a resolution prepared for the next Council meeting relating to the above. SUILDING BOARD MiNUTES - JULY 25, 1962: APPLICATIDN FOR BUILDING PERMIT FOR TWO FOUR-PLEXES AT 7325 AND 7351 ABLE STBEET NQRTEIEAST SY ROY PETERSON: The Building Board had recommended approval of these building permits subject to the Council waiver of the minimum of 50°! brick or stone exterior facing requixement, and the Board recommended granting such a waiver. The City Manager explained that in approving the preliminary plat for this subdivision, the Council had passed a motion limiting the multiple dwellings to double bungalows. Mr. Johanson stated that a public hearing wi11 have to be set up on this matter, and the people in the area invited to the public hearing. Mr. Johanson also stated that the 50% brick requirement was not needed on the type of construction proposed by Mr, Peterson. The City Manager suggested that the puUl�c hearing could he held next week, and notices could be delivered to ocaners in the area. Motion by Wo1ke that a hearing be set up for the discussion of building four-plexes rather than building double bungalows on Able Street for the next Council meeting, and the people be notified by delivered notice. Seconded by Johanson, Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Motion by Wolke to waive the 50'! brick requirement as recommended by the Building Board on the plans submitted by Mr. Peterson. Seconded by Johanson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. SUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR AN 18 UNTT APARTMENT BY SHELDON MORTENSON FOR PROPERTY WEST OF INTERSECTSON OF FII.LMORE STREET NORTHEAST AND T.H, �k100: There was discussion on this building. Motion by Wo1ke to grant the permit with the waiver of the limit of one living unit in the basement and allowing them to have living units in the basemenC. Seconded by 3ohanson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motLOn carried unanLmously. BUILDING PERMIT L�il There was discussion on these permits, Motinn by Wo1ke that � living units in the basement sub�ect to the City Attorney's legal, and working out the proper arrangements. Seconded by vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. BOARD 0� APPEALS - JULY 25, 1962; a waiver be granted for opinion that this is Johanson Upon a voice VARIANCE REQUEST ON SIDEYARD REQUTREMENT ON THE NORTH 88 FEET OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, INNSBRUCK FIRST ADDITION: The Board of Appeals had recommended that this varlance be granted. Motion by Wolke to approve this variance request and allow them to build within 5 feet of the side- yard on the above 1ot. Seconded by Sohanson. IIpon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. �30 B�D� N0. 72-1 Mr. Kohlan stated that there has been no further actioi. but the-,Council should be made aware of what has been done so far, on awarding the bids to Bianconi Construction Company Ior this pro�ect. Mr, Wolke stated that the bids which the County of Anoka had received for resurfacing of Central Avenue were not opened, and a11 of the bids were returned to the bidders unopened, and the bids were to be let sometime in September. There was considerable discussion as to whether there should be re-advertising for bids, or should the hids be awarded to the second lowest bidder, or what should be done on the above improvement pro�ect. Mr. Knutsou stated that he suggested that the Gouncil re-advertise, as the second lowest bidder was 39% higher than the Engineer�s estimate. Mr, Knutson stated that this pro7ect could be set up in two schedules, (1) same as the pro�ect had been put in before, ' and (2) putting only the minimum sewer and water services in. He stated that the completion date could also be lengthened. Mr, Kohlan suggested that the Council re-advertise for bids. There was discussion as to whether a hearing would be necessary if the bid price was considerably over the Engineer's estimate. The City Attorney stated that the hearing could be set up if it was found the bid did come in considerably over the Engineer's estimate. Motion by Johanson to adopt the resolution re-advertising for bids for Pro�ect No, 58 to be set up in two schedules as suggested by the Consulting Engineer, the bids to be opened at noon, August Z0, 1962. Seconded by Wo1ke. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. A➢JOURNMENT: There being no further business, the Acting Mayor, Mr. Nee, declared the meeting ad�ourned. Respectfully submitted: M�rviri , Brunsell Secretary to the Council COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 6, 1962 � ,�� , C� • ' � � � �-�-' J i irpyGR,- T, �, Greig A regular meeting of the City Council was called to oxdex by Mayor Greig at 5;30 P.M, Members Present: Members Absent Greig, Johanson, Nee, Wolke (arrived at 9:45 P,M,) Sheridan APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Motion by Nee to approve the minutes of the Board of E'qualization Meeting, July 16, 1962. Seconded by Johanson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Motion by Nee to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of July 16, 1962. Seconded by Johanson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Motion by Johanson to approve the minutes o£ the Special Meeting of July 17y 1962, Seconded by Nee. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion ca'tried unanimously. Motion by Johanson to approve the minutes of the Boaxd of Equalization Meeting, ,Tu1y 23, 1962. Seconded by Nee. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously, Motion by Nee to approve the minutes of the Special Meeting, July 30, 1962, Seconded by Johanson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. 1962-2 STREET SUREACING PROJECT: Mr, Nee stated that a petition had been presented to him asking for concrete curb and gutter on Van $uren and 75th Streets. There was a discussion on the two types ' '