My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-03-10 Reg
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
2014
>
2014-03-10 Reg
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/10/2014 9:59:09 AM
Creation date
4/10/2014 9:59:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
3/10/2014
TYPE
REGULAR
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
funding would be approved within a matter of days. Mr. Poehler stated that all of the documents <br />requested by the FTA will be submitted by the end of this week and the FTA is aware of the current <br />schedule to start advertising for construction in April. So while he cannot guarantee that they are <br />going to provide authorization to start spending down the construction funds in a couple of days, his <br />belief is that there should not be any significant issues with the submissions and therefore he <br />anticipates that their decision will be rendered in a relatively short period of time. <br /> <br />Mayor Welsch asked Mr. Poehler if he would clarify whether the funding has been approved and if <br />the TDD has already started spending down some of those funds. Mr. Poehler stated that the <br />original grant was for 25 million dollars and 4 million dollars has already been spent on the design. <br />He stated that recently the FTA provided authorization to start some of the early construction <br />st <br />activities. Two trees had to be removed prior to March 1 to avoid the migratory bird nesting <br />season and more recently the FTA has provided authorization to hire a construction management <br />firm. He stated that they have entered into a contract with a consortium that has started work on a <br />1.4 million dollar contract to staff all of the construction efforts. So as Mr. Wilson has mentioned <br />the Government would not have released these funds and allowed the trolley to utilize them if they <br />believed that the grant was in significant jeopardy. Mr. Poehler stated that approximately ten <br />months ago they had received a letter from the Federal Government which expressed concern over <br />the fact that adequate progress was not being made. He stated that at that point he was hired by <br />the TDD and in December they received another letter acknowledging that progress with respect to <br />technical, legal and financial capacities were now satisfactory. He stated that the letter also <br />included a list of the items that needed to be completed prior to the release of the construction <br />funds. <br /> <br />st <br />Mr. Kraft asked if the implication is that the Trolley Company cannot start the April 1 bidding <br />process without the C.U.P. Mr. Poehler stated that the real issue is the length of the project, and a <br />denial of the C.U.P. could result in a six month delay. Therefore if they were to start advertising <br />next month it would be unreasonable for them to ask a contractor to hold his bid for five months. <br /> <br />Mr. Wilson stated that there is also the possibility that having to go through the entire C.U.P. <br />process over again could change the plans. He stated that he would also like to remind Council <br />that construction of the roundabout is also tied into this project. Currently it is in pretty bad shape <br />and the City would like to start construction as soon as possible. <br /> <br />CITIZEN’S COMMENTS <br />John Rava, 7129 Washington <br />Mr. Rava stated that he has lived at his current address for forty-eight years and has been a <br />resident for sixty-six years. He has been an active citizen, working with Mayors Kaufman, Mooney <br />and Adams, an attorney for fifty years, and remains very interested in University City and its <br />present and future well being. Mr. Rava stated that he understands that the proposed vote to <br />extend the Loop Trolley Company’s C.U.P. is viewed as a quote “pro-forma action” which would <br />normally be approved by Council since they approved the original C.U.P. However he would urge <br />Council to take this opportunity to reconsider its original approval of the C.U.P. and the entire <br />notion of the Loop Trolley project. In fact, Council must deny the requested extension. He stated <br />that there are many reasons to reassess the wisdom of continuing to support this project and here <br />are some of the more obvious ones: <br /> 1. <br />Failure of the Loop Trolley Company to perform the requirements of the C.U.P. Mr. Rava <br />stated that this particular C.U.P. was granted to the Loop Trolley Company on March 11, 2014. <br />Under the applicable provisions of the City Code, Section 34-133.3, substantial construction work <br />was required to be commenced within one year of the effective date of the permit. But since no <br />substantial construction has commenced the permit expires today, March 10, 2014. He stated that <br />the Loop Trolley Company did request permission to destroy two trees on Delmar, presumably to <br />fulfill the substantial use requirement, although he was under the impression that permission had <br />been withheld. The Loop Trolley Company’s failure to perform in and of itself is reason enough to <br /> <br />deny approval of the requested extension. <br /> 2. <br />The Loop Trolley Transportation Development District, the applicant for the extension, is not <br />the holder of the original C.U.P. and therefore is not eligible either to apply for or to receive the <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.