Laserfiche WebLink
, . <br /> REGULAR t1EETING OF TH� OROP10 COUNCIL, OCTOBER 24, 1977 Page 33 <br /> t1HD 121 defines potable water as: "�aater nUAST, PRINTUP & PETERS <br /> free from impurities present in ariounts 14ATTER <br /> � sufficient to cause disease or harmful (Continued) <br /> � physiological effects. Its bacterioloc�ical <br /> and chemical quality shall conform to the <br /> � requirement of the tsinnesota State F3oard of <br /> Health. " <br /> � <br /> The State recommends that samples be taken to <br /> � verify water quality but they have no statutorv <br /> • authority to enforce the regulation or the <br /> sampling without the homeowner' s consent. The <br /> � State would consider a problem exists if the <br /> homeowner questioned his water c�ualitv, if the <br /> water was offered to the public or if there <br /> were a record of_ illness or pollution resulting <br /> � fron the water. <br /> f Staff - October 20, 1977 <br /> � Received a survey f_or the nuast property and <br /> a letter of rebuttal from rir. & P•irs. nuast. <br /> Briefly, they state that the entire petition <br /> matter arose from a neighborhood dis�ute about <br /> a dog and some weeds, much as Chief Kilbo <br /> described. <br /> They say they do not know half of the petitioners <br /> � and have not disturbed their property. nuast <br /> says that Printup and Peterson had given per- <br /> � mission for water drawn from their homes. nuast <br /> sals that the City authorized 25 chickens to <br /> � be penned on the property as of 15 vears ago (1962) . <br /> The City records show no record, but this is before <br /> the 1967 zoning ordinance and bef_ore comprehensive <br /> • record keeping. Quast also complains ahout <br /> various problems on the neighbor' s property. <br /> � 14emo from John R. rerhardson, Public Works Super- <br /> visor, concerning the f_ence on street right of <br /> way regarding the nuast, Printup, and Peterson <br /> � matter, dated October 20, 1977, states: <br /> � On the above date, Alan Olson, Assistant Buildinq & <br /> . Zoning Administrator, brought to m�� attention <br /> the proposed fence on the west extension of <br /> � i�iinnetonka Avenue. <br /> � The 5treet Department has for many years maintained <br /> the street where the fence is supposed to be <br /> � installed. At �the present time, it is ver_y <br /> • difficult to do any maintenance because of the <br /> � two garages that are already in the wav, If there <br /> are any more physical barriers, it would be next <br /> to impossible to continue maintenance. (Continued) <br /> � <br /> � <br />