Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" <br /> <br />Minutes of Regular Councl I Meeting <br />Page three <br /> <br />August 26, 1974 <br /> <br />Adams said he has purchased these homes for re~sale; they are new. <br />He said he has 5 older "movll la" homes coming In which are 5 to 6 years <br />old; a-fter restalnlng, they will look as good as new, and he InvIted the <br />Counc! I to Inspect both the new and 01 der homes. <br /> <br />Mr. Hutton stated he owns a 1970 model "movllla" home which he had <br />anticipated moving Into Arden Manor by August 1st, advising he can <br />postpone occupancy untl I September 15th, If necessary. <br /> <br />Council expressed concern re al lowing occupancy of the park until <br />sewer and water systems, and roads, have been approved. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />After considerable discussion, the Council concurred that a special <br />Council Meeting, prior to the next regular Counci I Meeting, wi II be <br />scheduled to expedite occupancy of that portion of the park In which <br />sewer, water and roads have been tested and recommended for approval; <br />area Is to be delineated on a drawing, and to not exceed 60 units. <br /> <br />Adams was requested to work with Lund, Joh.ailsen and Suburban Engineer- <br />Ing, and when he has approval, and a drawing Indicating area to be <br />approved for occupancy, he should notify the Village Council so special <br />:meeting can be scheduled. <br /> <br />Steak Inn Water Service <br />Lund re.fe rred the Council to his I atter of August 26, 1974, and recom~ <br />mended that a water main along the south side of County Road E would <br />be preferable to stubbing across County Road E for each connection. <br /> <br />Mr. Hage stated that Steak Inn <Terrestrial, Inc.l would Insta,ll the <br />approximate .495'-8" water main, and suggested that benefitted property <br />owners contribute something toward the cost, which Is estimated at <br />l8600. He requested that the Village secure the necessary construction <br />easement (permanent or temporaryl; cost of easement and engineering costs <br />to be assumed by Hags; suggesting that when another property conn.cts <br />that they <Terrestrial, Inc.) be reimbursed one-half of the cost. <br /> <br />After discussion, Crichton moved, seconded by Wingert, that the Council; <br />authorl ze the Vi II age to obtai n the necessary easement for the line, asj <br />d~lllleated; au"thorizlng Terrestrial, Inc. to Instal I the necessary 8" \ <br />line in accordance with specifications set forth by the Village Englneer~ <br />Motion carried unanimoUSly. <br /> <br />.~ ; <br />, <br /> <br />The financing procedure re future "hookups"to this main was referred <br />to lynden for recommendatIons to the Council, <br /> <br />REPORT OF VILLAGE TREASURER RICHARD O'KELLY <br /> <br />O'Kelly reported an lnvesi"ment on August 19, 1974, of $350,000.00 <br />for 90 days at 11.50%. <br /> <br />REPORT OF COUNCILMAN JAMES WINGERT - Planning and Zoning, Board of Appeals <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Case_No. 74-28, Fence Variance - George Weiss <br />~lIngert reviewed the application request to extend a 6' high fence along <br />the side property line approximately 5 feet Into the street rlght-of- <br />~ay;the purpose of the fence being to hide outside storage on adjacent <br />property. <br /> <br />Wingert reported that the Board of Appeals recommends approval, and <br />Public Works Supc,rvisor Johansen states he does not anticipate this <br />fence extension would cause problems tn plowing or road maintenance, <br />but the Planning Commission finds no basis to grant the variance. <br /> <br />After discussion, Wingert moved. seconded by Crichton, that the Councl I <br />deny the variance for the fence extension because of specific prohibi- <br />tion In Ordinance No. 99 (Sec. V. Ol. Motion carried unarilmously. <br /> <br />It was suggested that Mr. Weiss use low plantings for screening area. <br /> <br />Comprehensive Development Plan <br />tllngert reviewed the commeo.fs he received from Council members to date. <br />The commen1's re the "10% apartment limit" and "density designations" <br /> <br />-3- <br />