Laserfiche WebLink
74 <br /> August 16, 1982 <br /> 8.0 FEW BUS I NES S <br /> 8.1 1983 Budget <br /> The 1983 budget will be discussed at the meeting of September 7th. <br /> Engineer Kuusisto will inspect the city's paved streets to determine <br /> whether roads will require an overlay or sealcoating. <br /> 8.2 Resignation of Councilman Irsfeld <br /> MOTION: Schletty made motion, LaValle seconded, to accept the resig— <br /> nation of Councilman Larry Irsfeld effective September 8, 1982. <br /> All aye. Motion Carried. <br /> MOTION: Schletty made motion, McAllister seconded, that the City of <br /> Hugo appoint Lay Irsfeld as Councilman, Ward II, starting <br /> 9/9/82 and terminating 12/31/82. <br /> All aye. Motion Carried. <br /> 9.0 ATTORNEY AND ENGINEER <br /> Mr. Johnson submitted his monthly report. Mr. Johnson suggested that <br /> the City submit a bill to Mr. Arnold Monson for costs incurred for in— <br /> sta .lation of a new septic system at 12616 Ingersoll Avenue. <br /> Mr. Johnson has had some discussion with Carley Engineering to try and <br /> resslve the survey problem for the Husnik Industrial Park. <br /> MOTION: Irsfeld made mo- . on, Vail seconded, that the City Attorney <br /> work with Carley & Associates to try and resolve the legal <br /> description on the Jim Husnik plat. <br /> All aye. Motion Carried. <br /> JOHN NORTON — SPECIAL USE PERMIT <br /> Mr. Norton was present to discuss further the conditions of his Special <br /> Use Permit as approved June 21 , 1982. The permit has been signed but <br /> no financial guarantees have been submitted. Condition #1 of the per— <br /> mit requires the conditions of the SUP to be met within 60 days. Mr. <br /> Norton would have until August 20th to meet that requirement. Rice <br /> Creek Watershed has approved Mr. Norton's request to fill his lot <br /> located on Sunset Lake. The permit approves the placing of fill, only, <br /> and a permit for a septic system would have to be obtained at a later <br /> date. Mr. Norton submitted a letter from the adjoining property to <br /> the south stating that he had no objections to Mr. Norton filling <br /> the northern part of Lot 6, Block 1 , in the event fill would spill <br /> over onto his lot. Mr. Norton had contemplated installation of the <br /> retaining wall at a later date, but did agree to construct the wall, <br /> as specified in Exhibit A, and conditioned in #4 of the SUP. The <br /> Council understood that Mr. Norton's lot lying across the road was to <br /> be retained in the event that an alternate site wuuld be required for <br /> Lot 7, Block 1 . Mr. Norton suggethted an easement on his other lot <br /> would qualify if an alternate system would be necessary. Attorney <br />