Laserfiche WebLink
Session 1760 <br />June 21, 1999 <br /> <br />because they were only here to talk against the proposed development to be built in their <br />neighborhood. If she would have known about this, she would have gladly traded her time <br />to talk about MetroLink to talk about the plans for that proposed development. It is the big <br />and powerful players in the City, St. Louis and Clayton that wanted the route to go down <br />the Forest Park Parkway, and she knew at the beginning that it would be a logistical <br />nightmare because it was such a tiny corridor. She does not see how this plan is going to <br />work and she does not see why the City Council has to go on record and approve this new <br />resolution when the actual plans have not been seen and reviewed. She feels the City <br />Council is being pushed to become one of the first Councils to come forward to make a <br />compromise in advance of the plan being unveiled. She feels the vote on this resolution <br />should be tabled. <br /> <br />Emmanuel Paxhia, 6368 Washington, does not see the need to change the previous <br />resolution, because it does not make sense to him that they go under at Skinker and Big <br />Bend and come up in between. He believes we are just allowing EWGCC to do what they <br />want to do. He betieves that they are not going to even try to look for any more money to <br />do it right. We should not yield to them at this point by deviating from the previous <br />resolution. <br /> <br />Mr. Munkel moved adoption of the resolution. Mr. Sharpe seconded the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Lieberman saicl that it was important for the residents to understand that the City <br />Council of University City is not making the final decision on how this alignment is going to <br />be built, EWGCC is doing it; beyond our power. We have to let them know, however, what <br />kinds of things we will tolerate and live with. Our resolution, which was so strongly <br />worded, did not give EWGCC any wiggle room at all. It was at the point, where what we <br />wanted was considered as being too expensive and into the trash can it was going to go. In <br />order to get some consideration for our citizens, it seemed that the prudent thing to do <br />would be to do some negotiating and say we are willing to live with this, but Big Bend and <br />Skinker is a mess. We all agree, that it does not make sense to come back up again <br />between these two intersections, and it may very well be that we will get what we wanted <br />all along anyway. We are only trying to influence the decision the best we can. <br /> <br />Mr. Sharpe said that Mr. Lieberman is correct. If we do not make some attempt to <br />influence the decision in the most positive direction, then we will lose. He sincerely hopes <br />that EWGCC will not do something that the City will not support. We have a resolution that <br />we hope will be honored. We are not able to please all the people all the time, but <br />hopefully, what we have done will at least please some of the people. The Council is not <br />all pleased. The Council would prefer it to go all underground, as well. <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br /> <br />