Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19610814_19610822_regular_adjournedCLAIPZS PAID. dated August 14, 1961. Motion seconded by Tupa and carried. Park Sinking 6c Swinxning Pool Funds, $22,242.35; Water Fund, $25,400.36; Liquor Fund, $99,013598; Sewer Rental Fund, $22,938.68; Improvement Funds, $87,850.94-- Total, $273,155.85. Beim moved for payment ,*of the following Claims, as .per Pre-List General Fund, $10,704.88; Construetion Fund, $5,006.66; Park, Park Const., MEETING ADJOURNED TO TUESDAY, AUGUST 22, 1961, at 7:OO P.M. At this time Council was reminded by Clerk (who had this date returned from vacation) that Public Hearings on several special assessments are scheduled for next Monday, August 21. - Clerk was informed that it had already been ascertained that a majority of the Council will be unable to attend o Mon ay, August 21; that Special Assessment Clerk had been asked to publish/&!i@l$at hearings would be postponed to Tuesday, Augustr 22, at 7:OO P.M. Tuesday, August 22, at 7:OO P.M. Motion sec Meeting adjourned at 10:35 P.M. Beim then moved, adjourning this meeting to MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED PORTION OF THE AUGUST 14, 1961 REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA VILLAGE COUNCIL, HELD EIUESDAY, AUGUST 22, 1961, AT 7:OO P.M., AT THE EDINA VILLAGE HALL Members answering Rollcall were Beim, Dickson, VanValkenburg and Bredesen. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR TREE TRIMMING IMPROVEMENT NO. E-2. Pursuant to "Notice of Assessment Hearing on Tree Trimming Improvement No. T-2", published in Edina-Morningside Courier August 3 and 10, 1961, affidavit of which publication was presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file, Public Hearing was called on proposed assessment for the above entitled improvement. proposed to be assessed on a "per-lot" basis against the lots abutting the streets on which trees were trimmed, whether or not the particular lot has a tree, against 1,003 Lots, for $15.40 per Lot. There were no objections to the proposed assessment registered at the Public Hearing, and no written objections had been received prior thereto. Dickson's motion, that Assessment be approvedsas presented, was seconded by VanValkenburg and unanimously carried. (See Resolution of later in Meeting, Adopting and Confirming Assessment). Tabulation was read at Total Assessable Cost of $15,446.20, PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED'ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. ~~-18, IN CHANTREY ROAD FROM AYRSHIRE BLVD. TO HIGHWAY NO. 169. Clerk presented Affidavit of Publi- cation of "Notice of Assessment Hearing" in Edina-Morningside Courier August 3 and 10, 1961; and, pursuant to said Notice, Public Hearing was called. Tabulation was read at Total Assessable Cost of $16,722.09, proposed to be assessed against 20 lots at $7.98 per front foot, as compared with Improvement Hearing Estimate of $6.79 per Front Foot. Manager Hyde explained that increase in cost is due to two reasons; that the major reason is an under-estimate by the engineers on excavation and gravel; that the other reason is the widening of the entry way to Highway No. 169. Mr. Walter Lindley, 5525 Chawey, told Council he feels estimate should have been closer; also, that property owners were informed the'night of the improvement hearing that engineer's estimate is usually high. Asking what type of bid is obtained, he was informed that bids are on unit prices. He asked if perhaps manpower hours were figured including driveways rather than on street work alone, and was told that bids are not taken on manpower hours, but,rather, on unit prices of excavation, bituminous surface, etc. Mr. Tom Grady, 5505 Chantrey, inquired if it is not the policy to accept fixed-price contracts, and on receiving the answer that this is not the policy, inquired as to what safeguard the taxpayer has that he will be assessed an amount comparable to the estimate given. Manager explained that estimates are made up from the best available information; that soil borings are taken beforehand and that it is from the results of these tests that quantities are figured. Captain Gans told group that matter of taking core borings from the street is a matter of engineering judgment; that, in this particular case, worse soil conditions were encountered than were anticipated from test results. Mrs. Meinhofer, who stated she was responsible for the petition for this work, asked if the Village will not assume a share of the cost of widening the Highway No. 169 entryway; and Mr, Lindley told Council he feels there is a real question as to whether this entryway should be assessed against Chantrey Road at all--that it serves several other streets in addition to Chantrey; that the street was widened only for the purpose of contributing to the safety of the persons in the area. Mrs. Meinhofer told Council that there have been no accidents here since the widening of the street; that there were many before that time. Mayor Bedesen 8/22/61 told Council he feels Village should assume only that share of the cost of the entryway which is directly contributing the safety of the community, and Manager Hyde told audience that this cost would involve some 350 yards of bituminous surface at $1.20 per year, plus some base and excavation; that roughly it would mean a reduction of about $800. Village assumption of cost of widening the Highway No. 1'69 entryway; and Mr. Hyde asked those present if they wanted the Public Hearing continued to next meeting in order that the exact amount of reduction in assessment could be given to them, or if they would agree to levy of the assessment this evening, assessment as presented here tonight, after firm figures have been presented by engineering department. It was stated by one of the delegatlon that he felt this proposed deduction from the assessment was fair and reasonable, and there were no objections from the audience on levy this evening of the amended assessment. IDickson's motion, that Special Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-18 be amended by deducting therefrom the cost of the widening of the Highway No. 169 entryway as said cost is computed by the Village Engineering Department, and that said amended special assessment be levied, was seconded by Beim and unanimously carried.! (See Resolution of later in Meeting, Adopting Assessment). Council was agreeable to with understanding that cost of entryway widening will be deducted from the l PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. C-81--GRADING AND GRAVELING OF DALE AVE. FR(3M GROVE ST. TO BENTON AVE; AND GROVE ST. FROM E. LOT LINE OF LOT 7, BL. 2, MELODY KNOLLS 6TH ADDN. TO DALE AVE. Affidavit of Publication in Edina-Momingside Courier August 3 and 10, 1961 of "Notice of Hearing", and pursuant to said notice Public Hearing was called on this proposed assessment. $5,576.35, proposed to be assessed against 1,495 assessable feet, for $3.73 per assessable foot as compared with $4.78 as given at the improvement hearing. There were no objections from the floor, and no written objections had been received prior to the Hearing. tabulated was seconded by Dickson and carried. (See Resolution of later in Meeting, Adopting Assessment). Clerk presented Tabulation was read at Total Assessable Cost of Beim's motion approving levy of assessment as PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-32--CURB AND GUTTER AND BLACKTOP IN STREETS IN SOUTHDALE RESIDENTIAL AREA. Clerk submitted Affidavit of Publication in Edina-Momingside Courier August 3 and 10, 1961 of '*Notice of Hearing", and pursuant to said notice.Public Hearing was called on this proposed assessment. Manager Hyde read Tabulation at Total Assessable Cost of $54,455.37. He reported that improvement hearing estimate, based on a straight per-foot cost, was given at $6.27; that it was pointed out at the time of award of contract that bid was slightly higher than estimate; that, on a straight per-foot basis, with comer lots paying their full footage, the assessable cost would be $6.49.. Reviewing for Council the proceedings before the calling of his Hearing;- Manager Hyde said that several meetings of the Southdale neighborhood group have failed to secure unanimity as to the method of assessment; that in order to avoid neighborhood bad feeling it was decided that this office mail an advisory ballot to property owners, presenting several methods of assessment; that this was dong, methods presented being as follows 2 Method 1 Method 2 Method 3 All abutting Comer lots 1/3 of long footage as paying 20% side of originally more than comer lots p ropos ed interior lots assessed 4.38 Curb & Gutter $2.76 per Ft. $3.24 per Ft. $3.16 per Ft. 4.27 - - 3.73 Asphalt surface - TOTAL $6.49 $7.62 $7.43 that ballots were mailed to owners of the 143 parcels proposed to be assessed, and 86 ballots have been returned, 66 in favor of Method 1, 12 in favor of Method 2, and 8 in favor of Method 3. lots, reminded Council that petition had been presented for vacation of W.68th Street; that Council had declined to vacate for reasons of public safety--fire and police protection--proving that interior lots are benefited by improvement of cross streets; also, that every other community in the metropolitan area gives some assessment relief to comer lots. there is no question but that interior lots benefit by improvement of cross streets, stated he hopes the Council will consider some other method of assess- ment than the straight per-abutting-foot method. Trustee Dickson, stating that the Council has long had under consideration different methods for assessment of properties abutting cross streets, - -- -- said he favors Method 3, whereby corner lots are assessed for 1/3-their long footage and the balance-of the cross-street cost is spread over the entire area improved; that he will move that the Special Assessment now under consideration be levied on this method. Mr. Clifford Jensen, proponent of a method of assessment relief for comer Mayor Bredesen, saying he believes Saying that he agrees with Mr. Dickson, Mr. Beim seconded Dickson's motion, but only on condition that this method of assessment be the Council's policy for future assessments on above-ground improvements. f- .. . .? , *** . . ._ . . . - * ~, . 7 Comments from the audience were allowed before roll was taken on the motion. Mr. Warren Sturm told Council he feels that this method of assessment is fair . for those persons who are informed about it before signing a petition; that the great difference, here, is that petitioners for the improvement expected to pay for it on a straight per-abutting-foot basis. The owner at 6905 Cornelia Drive told Council he owned a comer lot for nine years and had to pay assessment for his full abutting footage; that he does not use the cross streets and feels he has no responsibility for payment for their improvement; also, that his driveway is cracked and-he doesn't want to pay anything at all for the street unless his driveway is replaced. the owner's invitation, explained that with the relatively thin layer of Portland Cement Concrete laid for driveway aprons cracks do appear in many cases; that in some instances aprons as much as 30 feet wide will have no cracks, whereas others not more than 12 feet wide will show one or two cracks; that in most cases these cracks are merely functional and will not contribute to the deterioration of the apron, and that in these cases the Village cannot replace driveway aprons. He added that if the cracks are due to inferior subsurface work the driveway will deteriorate, and if the driveway does fail it should be replaced by the Village. Mr. Neitzel asked Village policy on replacement of driveway apron be in the record before he pays any assessment,.and Mayor Bredesen informed him that if the driveway fails due to fault of the Village contractor the Village will pay for replacement; that if the fault is not the VillageIs, then replacement cost will not be borne by the Village. One lady, who did not give her name, told that the great majority of voters have voted for Method 1 and it is her opinion that inasmuch as the Council invited the vote they should abide by it. informed that only 66 lots, of the 143 proposed to be assessed, have voted for Method 1. Mr. Greensweig, owner of a comer lot, said he had talked to the Village Hal1,was informed assessment would be on a per-lot basis. One man, who did not give his name, told Council he feels Method 3 is a fair assessment. He explained he is not in the area now under consideration--but, that on an area-wide petition the owners of interior lots can "force paving down the throats" of comer lot owners; that, should this policy not be adopted, he feels corner lot owners should be given some special consideration in opposing improve- ment of cross streets. assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-32 on Method 3, and it was as follows: Beim, aye; Dickson, aye; VanValkenburg, aye; and Bredesen, aye; and the motion was unanimously carried. (See Resolution of later in Meeting, Adopting Assess- ment). I Captain Gans, stating he had inspected this driveway at '% I Council she feels Council has broken faith with the people who voted; She was I Roll was then taken on the motion to levy the special COUXCIL ESTABLISHES POLICY ON ASSESSING CORNER LOTS FOR CROSS-STREET ABOVE- GROUND IMPROVEMENTS. Relative to the foregoing discussion and previous discussions hald by'the Council concerning assessments for cross-street improve- ments,zBeim offered the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING POLICY ON ASSESSMENT FOR CROSS-STREET IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, cross streets, which abut the long sides of comer lots, are used by all traffic; and WREREAS, corner lots in many subdivisions no longer command a higher sale value than interior lots; and TJHEREAS, most other municipalities recognize that improvement of cross streets benefits corner lots in an amount less than the full cost of said improvements, and does benefit interior lots to some extent: NOW, THEREFORE, BIT RESOLVED by the Village Council of the Village of Edina that unless good cause is shown for making special assessments in a di€ferent manner, all future assessments for the cost of above-ground improvements on cross streets will be levied on the basis of an assessment against comer lots for one-third of their long-side abutting footage, and an assessment for the cost of the excess footage against the entire arga-improQed:c: .E. Motion for adoption of the Resolution was seconded by Dickson, and on Rollcall there were four ayes and no nays, as follows: VanValkenburg, aye; and Bredesen, aye; and the Resolution was adopted. Beim, aye; Dickson, aye; Mayor 8/22/61 PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. 0-75A--OIL STABILIZEDBASE IN RICJWOOD DRIVE: SHERWOOD ROAD FROM RICHWOOD DRIVE TO HWY .8169 I. ANI) EDENMOOR STREET FROM SHERWOOD ROAD TO RICHWOOD DRIVE. Clerk presented Affidavit of Publication in Edina-Morningside Courier August 3 and 10, 1961, of “Notice of Hearing”, and pursuant to said notice, Public Hearing was called on this propos$klni:yqent. Tabulation was read at Total Assessable Cost of $5,579.83,/proposeX Hyde toldCounci1 that an alternate has been figured on a per-lot basis for the residential area, with an estimate of $113.05 per lot for interior lots and $135.66 for corner lots. Mr. Hyde read the letter of Mr. Kermit 0. Johnson, President of the Richmond Hills Improvement Association, stating that after a visit by ME. Hyde to the Association, a petition for compromise settlement in an attempt to help the people with large front footage had been circulated, but that the petition had received the signatures of owners of less than half the owners in the area. Mr. Roy Werges, Treasurer of the Association, stating there is some question about the way this opinion was obtained, stated he feels the formula basis should be considered for the assessment. Mr. Larson brought to .Council’s attention the notice mailed by the Association to its members, dated August 15, which told members that unless the .Association presented a workable formula to the Council the assessment would be on a straight per-foot basis. Reminding the Council that the petition for assessment on a per-lot basis had failed, one property owner objected to paying for any part of neighbor’s cost--either frontage or side footage. Beim then movedothat this assessment be 3evied in accordance with the policy established this evening-- on the basis of corner lots paying an assessment on 1/3 of their long sides for the improvement of cross streets, the balance being spread over the assessable area. Motion was seconded by VanValkenburg and unanimously carried. (See following Resolution Adopting Assessments). Beim moved for adoption of following Resolution: be assessed on a per-foot basis at $.97 per foot. Mr. a 33 en a m a3 . RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR TREE TRIMMING IMPROVEMENT NO. T-2, AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-18, C-81, BA-32, AND 0-75A BE IT RESOLVED by the Village Council of the Village of Edina, Minnesota, as follows : for TREE TRIMMING IMPROVEMENT NO. T-2, AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA-18, C-81, BA-32 AND 0-75A, and each of them, have been properly calculated in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Sections 429.051 and 429.061; that notice has been duly published, as required by law, that this Council would meet to hear and pass upon all objections, if any, to amend said proposed assessments as might be necessary, and to adopt the same by resolution; that said proposed assessments have at all times since their filing been open for public inspection and opportunity has been given to all interested persons to present their objections; and that each of the lots, pieces and parcels of land enumerated in the respective assessments for TREE TRIMMING IMPROVEMENT NO. Q-27and STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. C-81 was and is specially benefited by the construction of the improvement for which such assess- ment is levied in the amount set opposite the description of each such lot, piece and parcel of land respectively. and parcels of land enumerated in the proposed assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-18 is specially benefited by the construction of the improvement for which such assessment is levied in the amount set opposite the description of each such lot, piece and parcel of land respectively, less a reduction from each such respective assessment in an amount equal to the front-foot reduction in assessment for the cost of widening the Chantrey Road-Highway ill69 entryway (granted by Council at this meeting) multiplied by the number of front feet in each respective lot, 1. It is hereby found, determined and declared that the proposed assessments 2, It is hereby found, determined and declared that each of the lots, pieces piece and parcel of land. 174 ' . 3. It is hereby found, determined and.declared that each of the commercial and Village- lots, pieces and parcels of land enumerated in the proposed assessment for Street 'improvement No. 0-75Awas and is specially benefited by the construction of the improvement for which such assessment is levied in the amount set opposite the description of each such lot, piece and parcel of land respectively; and, further, that each residential lot, piece and tract of land in said proposed assessment for Street Improvement No. 0-75A and in said proposed assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-32 was and is specially benefited by the construction of said respective improvement in an amount to be computed as follows: 1 A. B. C. D. 4. The Total Assessable benefited plus 1/3 the long-side footage of corner lots abutting the respective improvements. Cost per Assessable Foot will equal the Total Assessable Cost divided by the Total Assessable Footage. Interior Lots will be assessed an amount equal to Cost per Assessable Foot multiplied by front footage of each respective lot. Corner Lots will be assessed an amount equal to Cost per Assessable Foot multiplied by front footage of each respective lot, plus Cost per Assessable Foot multiplied by 1/3 the long-side footage of each respective lot. Footage will equal the total front footage of each lot I amounts so set out are hereby levied against the respective lots, pieces and parcels. of land described in said respective assessments, and said proposed assessments are hereby adopted and confirmed as the proper special assessments for said improvements, respectively. The assessment against each lot, tract or parcel, together with the interest accruing on the full amount thereof from time to time unpaid, at the rate of five percent per annum from the date of: this resolution, shall be a &%en concurrent with general taxes upon the property described therein and all thereof. The total amount of the assessment for TREE TRIMMING IMPROVEMENT NO. T-2 s&ll be payable in one installment, saidinstallment, together with interest on the entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1962, to be payable with the general taxes for the year 1961, collectible in 1962. The total amount of each such assessment for STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. C-81 and STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. 0-75A shall be payable in equal consecutive annual installments extending over a period of three years, the first of said installments, toget er wit i terest.on the e ire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, l~!&.$?n~a$~f.wfd~ aining fo 1961; ins t a?f,,nt s one year s interest on that and all subsequent installments, to' e pay8 fe with genera$ taxes €or the.years 1962 and 1963, collectible in the respective ensuing years. The total amount of each such assessment for STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-18 and STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-32 shall be payable in equal consecutive annual installments extending over a period of ten years, the first of said installments, together with interest on the entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1962, to be payable with the general taxes for the year 1961, and one of the remaining installments with one year's interest on that and all subsequent installments, to be payable with general taxes for the years 1962 through 1970, collectible in the respective ensuing years. 5. Prior to certification of the assessments to the County Auditor, the owner of any lot, piece or parcel of land assessed hereby may pay the whole of such assessment or any installment thereof without interest to the Village Treasurer; provided that if any assessments or installments thereof be prepaid to the Village Treasurer, he shall promptly notify the Village Clerk and County Auditor, and the assessment or installment so prepaid shall be cancelled on the books of the County Auditor. -The Clerk shall, as soon as may be, prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a certified duplicate of said assessments, with each then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended upon the proper tax lists of the County, and the County Auditor shall thereafter cause said assessments to be collected in the manner provided by law. FOR TREE TRIMMING IMPROVEMENT NO. T-2, STREET IMPROVEMENTS NOS. C-81, EA-18, BA-32 AND 0-75A; and all amounts collected in respect of the assessments for TREE TRIMMING IMPROVEMENT NO. T-2, AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS NOS. C-81, BA-18, BA-32 shall be similarly designated by the County Treasurer and remitted to the Village Treasurer and by him credited to the IMPROVmNT BOND REDEMPTION FUND. All amounts collected in respect of the assessments contained in the assessment roll for STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. 0-75A shall be similarly designated by the County Treasurer and remitted to the Village Treasurer and by him credited to the SINKING FUND OF THE PERMfiNENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVING FUND. I 6. Said duplicated shall be.designated as the ASSESSMENT ROLL Motion for adoption of Resolution was seconded four ayes and no nays, as follows: Beim, aye; *3 r sen, aye; and the Resolution was adopted. Mayor Village Clerk BUDGET FOR YEAR 1962 was presented to Council for the purpose of study and review before the scheduling of budget meetings. 175 8/22/61 .I'. , . .*<. *VI*. I.. LOT 7, BLOCK '4, ~~MIELSSOHN b~N. 'ACQUTREI~ io^ 'STORM SEWER PURP~SES. It was reported that this lot is available for acquisition by the Village for Storm Sewer purposes, for the payment of back taxes; that the greatest share of the unpaid tax bill is for special assessments on sanitary sewer. recommended that the Village obtain the lot for storm sewer purposes, paying the back taxes thereon, and it was so ordered, by motion VanValkenburg, seconded by Dickson and carried. STATE Mr. Dalen COUNCIL ASKS/HIGHWAY DEP~TMENT TO ELIMINATE CUL-DE-SAC ON RYAN AVENUE SOUTH OF W.62ND ST. and Beim offered same, moving its adoption: Manager Hyde recommended adoption of the following Resolution, RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE ELIMINATION OF A CUL-DE-SAC ON RYAN AVENUE JUST SOUTH OF WEST 62ND STREET,AND THE CONNECTION OF RYAN AVENUE WITH WEST 63RD STREET AND PARNELL AVENUE WHEREAS, on September 26, 1960, the Edina Village Council, by resolution, duly adopted, approved Plans and Specifications for Grading, Base and Surfacing of Trunk Highway Ng. 100 between pest 6$th Street and Valley View Road; and WHEREAS, said PJans provide for a cul-de-sac,midway between Wes: 62nd Street and West 63rd Street, on Ryap Avenue; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the Village of Edina'and the Minnesota Highway.Department to eliminate the cul-de-sac and connect Ryan Avenue with Parnell Avenue at West 63rd Street: NOW, TJEREFORE, BE IT,RESOLVED by the Village Council of the Village of Edina that this Council request the State Highway Department to make the change necessary and as agreed upon between the State Highway Department and the Village of Edina to provide continuity in the street traffic pattern by extending Ryan Avenue to intersect with Pamell Avenue and West 63rd Street, at the expense of the Minnesota Highway Department. Motion for adoption of Resolution was sec . Rollcall there , COUNCIL AUTHORIZES SALE OF $2,200,000 PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT BONDS: $650,000 TEMPORARY IMPROVEMENT BONDS AT PUBLIC SALE, $600,000 TO SINRING FUNDS OF VILLAGE. Supplementing his report of August 14, Finance Director Dalen presented a tabulatiqn showing the construction improvements for which contracts have been awarded and which now need financing. He recommended the sale of $2,200,000 Permanent Improvement Bonds in October, and the public sale of $650,000 Temporary Improvement Bonds September 11, temporary bonds to have term of not to exceed 60 days. Beim's motion authorizing bond sales in accordance with Mr. Dalen's recommendation was seconded by Dickson and carried,. motion also including authorization for sale of $600,000 Temporaries to Village Sinking Funds, COUNCIL AUTHORIZEB REQUEST FOR ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL AID FROM STATE HIGEBJAY DEPARTMENT. be secured through the State Highway Department at a rate commensurate with, or less than, that charged by Twin City Testing Laboratories. authorize such work by the State , and Dickson offered the following Resolution and moved its adoption: Captain Gans reported he has been informed that soil borings can He asked that Council RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REQUEST FOR TECHNICAL AID FROM STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT BE IT RESOLVED that, pursuant to statutory authority, the Director of Public Works and Engineering, for and on behalf of the Village of Edina, is hereby authorized to request and obtain from the Minnesota Department of Highways needed engineering and technical services during the year of 1961, for which payment will be made by the Village of Edina upon receipt of verified claims from the Commissioner of Highways. Motion for adoption of Resolution was seconde Valkenburg , and on Rollcall lkanburg, aye; and Bredesen, aye; Dickson then moved for adjournment, motion-was seconded by Beim and carried, and Meeting adjourned at 9:lO P.M.