My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCMin_63Jun26
FalconHeights
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
196x
>
1963
>
CCMin_63Jun26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 8:22:42 AM
Creation date
6/22/2009 10:57:16 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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).
View images
View plain text
1950 <br />J. M. McGregor We live north of this proposed line. We were wondering <br />1795 No. Fairview: if some .study could be made of extending that line to <br />cover our property if possible to benefit our prop®rties. <br />Mr. Lemberg wrote it was terminus and the sewer would be <br />about 6 six feet deep, Would it not be worthwhile to run <br />a sewer in now and extend the line further north? <br />Lemberg: This study has been made - Larch 5, 1962. At that time <br />this had been checked out. Two possibilities of serving <br />the property north of Lindig Avenue - connect to Fairvi6nr <br />Avenue sewer, or the other would be to jog over to the East. <br />McGregor: I think more studies could be made on the utili2ation. We <br />request a further study be made about extending that <br />project to add on to it. There are only three homes. involved. <br />Attorney Friel: This could be petitioned and Hearing could be called, <br />Lemberg: A j,og to the east and then to the north with minimum cover <br />of six feet at the end of the Lindig property. 'that would <br />involve just the cost of the jog and it would go through <br />the back of your lots. <br />Shavor: Could we undertake an addition without endangering this <br />big project? <br />Lemberg: This is a legal problem and if it is legally possible, that <br />has been checked out and the line would go through the back <br />lots and I do not know that they would be willing to give an <br />easement on 50 foot lots. Another thing, without a street, <br />the water and sewer would be no good. 1rYhere are you going <br />to run the road? <br />Lindig: There would have to be a turn around. <br />Lemberg: It is not feasible to fill in that whole area back there arxi <br />it would not be feasible to cut out the ponding area back <br />there, either. <br />Shavor: I think it would be poor planning now to put anything in <br />there now without the property developed. <br />McGregor: Our problem is that the land is higher. We haven't te~:ked <br />to Mrs. Lindig at all. <br />Friel: If, as the engineer says, the additional cost would not <br />exceed 25~, it would be all right to add it on. <br />Nilsens It would appear that you people would like to get the proper <br />easements in order. <br />Friel: An easement is when you give the village the perpetual <br />right to maintain a utility easement over a strip of ground <br />describing the width and depth and also the right to go <br />into that property to repair or replace as necessary, <br />Shavor: Can you put an easement on it without the road? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.