Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, 'I <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />Mrs. Stromquist <br />12-1 and 12-3 <br /> <br />July 20, 1970 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />along the north boundary line of the improved lots which front <br />on the frontage road facing Highway #10. Mr. Lund advised the <br />commissioners that Banister Engineering had considered this but <br />found it to be impractical. <br /> <br />Prior to this hearing and on May 12th, 1970, the commissioners, <br />Donald Lund and I viewed the condemnation sites. At that time <br />we discovered that the portion of Mrs. Waldoch's property en- <br />compassed by 12-3 had sod on it which obviously had been laid <br />by the owners of the improved lots which face on the frontage <br />road. We also noticed that only one tree would be affected by <br />the construction of 12-3. <br /> <br />At the hearing, the commissioners asked Mr. Lund what was to be <br />done about restoring the property affected by 12-3 to its original <br />condition. Mr. Lund advised the commissioners that the ground <br />and grade would be restored to its original condition. The <br />commissioners then queried about what was to be done with respect <br />to the sod. I pointed out that the sod had not been laid by Mrs. <br />Waldoch but by the abutting property owners. Thus, Mrs. Waldoch <br />was merely a beneficiary thereof. The commissioners took the <br />position that it did not make any difference who laid the sod; <br />the sod was going to be removed in the construction; and it would <br />either have to be replaced or Mrs. Waldoch would have to be re- <br />imbursed therefor. I frank~y had to agree with them but never- <br />the~ess wanted to make a point. <br /> <br />Upon the advice of Mr. Lund, I agreed with Mr. Mikeworth that <br />the award should include a reimbursement to Mrs. Waldoch for re- <br />sodding. <br /> <br />The testimony of <br />was uneventful. <br />are involved. <br /> <br />Don Lund and the discussion with respect to 12-1 <br />This is undeveloped property, and no sod and trees <br /> <br />Subsequent to the hearing, at Mr. Courtney's suggestion I had Mr. <br />George Membrez inspect the condemnation sites and render an estimate <br />of the value of the damages to the property involved in this con- <br />demnation. His estimate was received on June 20th, 1970, and con- <br />tained the following figures: <br /> <br />Easement 12-1 (Commercial Property): <br />Permanent 110'x30' -- 3300 sq. ft. <br />Construction l40'x30' -- 4200 sq. ft. <br /> <br />$220.00 <br />84.00 <br />$304.00 <br />