Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />Sept. 23, 1987 <br />Imp. <br />Hearing <br />Noel Dr. <br />Extended <br />(Cont.) <br />not be put in on Allen until the line can be run all the way through <br />to Edgerton. Moravetz also was concerned that any additional patching <br />of Allen Avenue would cause the condition of the street to worsen. <br />Moravetz pointed out that there would have to be utilities relocated, <br />and he would be inconvenienced by this. <br />Moravetz stated that he would like to see Noel Drive improvement when <br />the whole street can be put in through to LaBore Road. Moravetz <br />was also concerned about the drainage of the area and felt the <br />project as proposed would cause further drainage problems. <br />The City Engineer stated that the purpose of the storm sewer would be <br />to improve the drainage in the area. <br />Moravetz presented the Council with a picture of the area containing <br />standing water after a rain storm. <br />Larry Hartmann, 466 Al1en Avenue, stated that he, too, was opposed to <br />the project, even though he has been assessed for watermain in the <br />past and would receive no assessment for this improvement. <br />There was no one else present wishing to comment. <br />Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION N0. 87-9-447 - CLOSING THE <br />PUBLIC HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT N0. 87-13, <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Collova. <br />Ayes (5) Fahey, Collova, Scalze, LaValle, Blesener. <br />Nays (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 18, Page 473. <br />The City Clerk reported that the City has received a letter from <br />David Abbot, 475 Al1en Avenue, stating that he was opposed to the <br />project. <br />Fahey pointed out that $21,000 assessment per lot for the extension <br />of Noel Drive, and stated that he was opposed to asking Mr. Bruhn <br />to give his property away in order that Mr. Wright can develop <br />three lots. Fahey questioned why Mr. Wright even wanted to develop <br />the property at so high a cost. Fahey pointed out that the City <br />has to justify an assessment against a property, and felt that a <br />$21,000 assessment per lot was not justifiable or appropriate. <br />blright suggested that the project be put out for bid. Wright <br />pointed out that unless Ploel Drive is improved his property is <br />landlocked. Wright questioned why he should pay taxes on property <br />he cannot develop. <br />Page -12- <br />