Laserfiche WebLink
<br />With no more to report Councilman Domenico <br />moved that the City Administrators report <br />be accepted and placed on file. Seconded <br />by Councilman McDonald. Motion carried. <br /> <br />COUNCIL COMMENTS & <br />COMMITTEE REPORTS <br />E.F. INDUSTRIES <br />ALEX DOMENICO <br /> <br />Councilman Caranci stated that he had <br />checked his past minutes of February <br />3, 1976, regarding the problem between <br />E. F. Industries and Alex Domenico. <br />He stated that the minutes read that Mr. <br />Domenico would accept the report of an in- <br />dependent firm. City Administrator Wurl <br />stated that when he wrote the letter to <br />Mr. Domenico about the discussion of <br />the problem for the April 20, 1976, <br />Council meeting, he errored and put that <br />it would be discussed at the May 4, 1976 <br />meeting; therefore, it was left on the <br />April 20, agenda and will be reviewed at <br />the May 4, meeting. <br />Councilman Caranci asked if the report from <br />E.F. Industries was being accepted by <br />the City. <br />Mr. Wurl stated that it was being accepted <br />by the City, and it was still his feeling <br />that the matter is being resolved between <br />E. F. Industries and Mr. Domenico. <br />He also stated that he enclosed a copy of <br />the report from E. F. Industries along with <br />the letter encourgaging Mr. Domenico to <br />attend the May 4, meeting to respond. <br />Councilman DelPizzo stated that he recalled <br />that earlier in the year he had made a <br />motion that if the E. F. Industries report <br />was not satisfactory, then a private firm <br />would" be hired for a report and that would <br />be the end of the issue. He felt that <br />there was a misunderstanding of the motion. <br /> <br />COLABELLO CONSTRUCTION <br />ON LA FARGE STREET <br /> <br />Councilman DelPizzo asked how Mr. Colabello <br />got permission to build a new structure on <br />a 25 foot lot. <br />Mr. Wurl stated that the new structure is <br />narrower then the old one and although it <br />does not meet set back requirements, the <br />new structure is better then the old which <br />set on a property line on one side. <br />This was the basis that the new structure <br />was approved by the board as Mr. Wurl <br />understood. <br /> <br />-7- <br />