Laserfiche WebLink
2~3 <br />REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1966 <br />1 <br />The regular meeting was called to order at 7s00 P.M. with the following presents <br />Mayor Nilsen, Clerk Strandquist, Councilman Black and Warkentien. Absents <br />Councilman Stone.- Also present were Engineer Lemberg,_.Attorney Kyle and - <br />Treasurer Olsen. _ _ <br />Minutes: Strandquist moved, seconded by Nilsen that the minutes of <br />• the meeting of August 2l~, 1966 be approved. Ayes: All. <br />Nayst None. Motion was carried. . <br />Correspondence <br />Mando Photos Letter under-date of September 1l~, 1966 from Ruttenberg, <br />_ fJrren, Griswold and Cohen, attorneys at-3aw, advised that <br />Mando Photo has nor acquired the property at 1780 west <br />Larpenteur Avenue which property will be used as parking <br />space. <br />1 <br />1 <br />• Mr. Ruttenberg, representing Mando Photo, and Mr. Walsh <br />of the Steenberg Construction Company, were present. Council <br />reviewed some of the plans andadvised the two representatives <br />that a meeting with the Village Attorney and Village <br />consulting Engineer would be in~order, <br />~t©rthome Walter Stepnitz and Don Julen~ representing the Cohen <br />~< •S~~pping Properties known as Narthome Shopping Center were present. <br />Centers They advised that they would appear at the council meeting <br />of October 12 to reviev~ plans for the parking area located <br />at the rear of these properties. <br />HEARING <br />Larpenteur- <br />Albert Imp. <br />Wm. G. <br />Bertossi <br />1750 No. Alb <br />At 8:00 P.M. Mayor Nilsen opened the Public Hearing for the <br />Proposed Assessment for the Improvement of Larpenteur and <br />66 la Albert by„the construction of a storm sewer... drainage area <br />described as Improvement 66-1), Clerk Strandquist read <br />the notice of Public Hearing, -.Attorney Kyle explained <br />assessment procedures. <br />v f <br />The first thing I do not understand is why it should be <br />erts assessed to the property owners, It seems like it is a <br />. repair job just as an ordinary repair job in the streets, <br />How about if in two or five years it needs further repair <br />who pays than? Will it go back to the property owners again? <br />I think it never should have been brought up here. I donut , <br />think we shotald be charged for it. <br />Lembergs Under normal procedure, this is how it is handled. The <br />original drainage was put in by the county and went to the <br />edge of the county right-»of-gray. We have gone back now <br />and tried to correct this somewhat and we feel that our <br />design is going to work. Tam optimistic. <br />Bertossis Why not go back to the county and make them pay for it? <br />Lemberg: The water isn~t coming from the county road. We have to <br />remember as more homes are being built, problems are created. <br />-. Probably 20 years ago there were ditches that adequately <br />handled water. <br />