Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.R. JZ\"'::,s COSBY, actinq Village l1anager, read a <br />letter that had been received from '~r. rI'homas ~1.ilillrnus <br />of II'. il. t'illrnus Construction, 2025 '1est County Road C, <br />in w!1ich he indicated elat he olJposed the improvements <br />and asked that an additional study be made, with a <br />continuation of the public hearing to July 1. <br /> <br />iR. B. JEROi'(Z LOFTSGAARDLN, 740 River Drive, St. <br />Paul (Ol.,ns property in the improvement): Said he doesn I t <br />believe there's a need to extend both Prior Avenue and <br />Oakcrest. He agreed with r'ir. viillmus' proposal to <br />continue the hearing to a later time to alloN a further <br />study to be made and to determine whether or not State <br />Aid would be available. Further said that runninc <br />the sewer line to Cleveland if Oe.kcrest c:1'oes in '\'1ould be <br />an assess~ent expense against the property without a henefit. <br />Also questioned the feasibility of a nortion of the storm <br />se~,rer ir.provernent on the east side o~ Cleveland. If you <br />consider the amount of money it Nill cost to put the <br />if'lprove"1ents in ant' propose to assess only these irproved <br />properties there's a question of feasibility if it's <br />recoanized that these roads are for the ~eneral public. <br /> <br />T~:r;.. VICTOR. LArT'I'TI, Lanetti & Sons, 2560 Cleveland <br />Avenue North Ee ~tlOuld a':='r'lreciate it if the Council would <br />hold the t"'atter in abeyance until he haG had a chance to <br />stu~y the feasibility report and aive the Council ~o~e <br />preli!"1inary ideas as to ~'That he has in mino for t~1e <br />development of his property. <br /> <br />The hearing closed at 9:40, with the Council to take <br /> <br />further action. <br />