Laserfiche WebLink
MzrruTSs <br />City Counci.l. <br />June 9, 19£32 <br />I3ehr The foregoin~ resolution was duly seconded by P1r. Ilanson. <br />Pi.ll Permit Ayes (5) Iahey, Hanson, ScaLze, Nardini, Porsber.g. <br />(Cont.) Nayes (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />Tliis resoLution appears in Resolution I~oolc No. 8, Page 258, <br />Mr. Chlebeck informed the Council that the two ponds in Che area <br />are not connected and therefore the DNR has no control over them. <br />The DNR only has control when something is over 2 1/2 acres. <br />MGM The City Clerk reported that representatives of MGM would not be <br />present unti.l af.ter H:30. The clerk, therefore, recommended that <br />Agen<la these items be handled later in the meeting. <br />Items No. 7 <br />and 8 <br />Canabur.y Mr. Flarland Rowland of the Canabury Condominium Homeowners <br />Condominiums Association appeared before the Council. Mr. Rowl.and informed <br />Road the Council that he has contacted the County about upgrading Demont. <br />Improvement Ne was i.nformed that this is on t}ieir list of pr.ojects, but because <br />Petition of budp,et cutbacks i.t wi7.l probably not get done this year. Mr. <br /> Rowland stated that he was informed that i.f the City went to bat <br />Agenda for the project, there is a possibi.lity that it could get done. <br />Item No. 9 Mr. Rowland also stated that Canabury Drive is also deterior.ating. <br /> Mr.. Rowland stated that the Associ.ati.on ~aould appreciate anything <br /> that the Council could do for them. <br />The CLerk reported thaC Canabury Drive is part CounCy and part Hi.ghway <br />Department. <br />Mr. Ilanson stated that the City should go on recorcl directin~ a <br />letter to the County infor.ming them that the CiCy has been petitioned <br />r.egardi.ng this work, and requesting that the County malce this a priority <br />item. <br />Mr. Pahey aslced if the worlc w~uld U~. assessed back to the homeowners. <br />Mr. Rocaland stated that this has not been cione in the past. <br />Mr. Porsberg stated that the problem has been the laclc of maintenance <br />on these streets. <br />Mr. Roger Glanzer inf.ormed the Council that [he County cannot assess <br />people. The City could request the worlc be done by the County and then <br />assess the homeowners for i.t. Mr. Glanzer stated that the problem is <br />that the County does not have the money to do the work at this time. <br />Mrs. Scalze asked why there are curbs on a portion of the street. <br />Mr. Glanzer repli.ed that the County improved a portion of the sCr.eet <br />in the past. <br />Page -5- <br />