res_5328 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

MR. JOSEPH REGNIER, 990 w. Shryer Avenue: Asked what the exact location of the storm sewer would be relative to his property. MRS. VICTOR ANDRES, 901 Parker Avenue: said they have no drainage problem and with all the people on Parker Avenue who had signed a petition opposing the construction of the improvement, asked if the Council would just forget Parker Avenue and start the improvement on the next street. MR. RICHARD BEHR, 960 Burke: OWns property at 965 Parker. The village will not allow him to build on the property because if he fills it in it will push the water on his neighbor's yard. In favor of the improvement. MR. RICHARD KOWARSCH, 1015 Parker: Asked about the location of catch basins. Further asked if this improvement would drain the sloughs. MR. JAMES H. CASEY, 1965 N. Victoria: His question concerned the area of the improvement where it borders Victoria along the angle of Victoria and going north. There is a swamp on both sides of the street and he wanted to know why that was included in the drainage area since it creates no problem for anybody. He felt it was not desirable to drain all the swamps and because the property belongs to Rose1awn Cemetery and they can't be assessed or taxed for the improveu.ent, that portion should be excluded. MR. HOWARD REILAND, 1056 Parker Avenue: All of the lots on Parker are 85 x 468 which is very close to an acre of land. Would they be assessed on the acreage basis or the front foot basis. MR. ERNEST OBERG, 978 Parker (Spoke before): the assessments for an individual lot as oppossed assessments and who determined whether or not one split into two lots. Inquired about to acreage lot could be MR. AL DE1~INE, 887 Parker Avenue: Said he has already paid $200 on storm sewer and doesn't feel he should have to pay an additional $250. ~ffi. HOWARD HOCHULA, 1024 Parker: Asked if filters would be needed in the storm sewer system.