09-25-2002 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 25, 2002 have the right Yo develop their property. Fahey noted that in this case, the City has indicated that it did not support a variance fora 1,000 foot cul-de- sac, and that a second road access would be an improvement to public safety and also ensures the looping of the water system. Scalze pointed out that it is the City's right to say whether or not a road will develop. Fahey indicated that he gets the feeling that the distances being proposed by the neighborhood for a pipeline setback ordinance are an effort to preclude development. Fahey noted that the owner/developer of property has rights to develop property as long as City standards are met. Fahey agreed, however, that if he owned a property on Viking Drive that was now to become a corner lot, he would not be happy about it. Scalze again noted that these property owners purchased their homes with certain expectations that will now change if the City approves a road through to Viking Drive. Scalze did not believe such a change has occurred in any other area of the City. Fahey noted the potential for this to happen in the area of Arcade Street and LaBore Road given there are 3.5 acres ofunder-developed property in that area. The City has gone on record that a road improvement will be necessary to develop this site. Anderson noted the impact of the City's action vacating right-of--way and granting a variance for the Roberto property on Rose Lane and Savage Lane that changed expectations for existing property owners in that area. It was also noted that Ontario Road was developed as a through street based on Council direction even though the original proposal was for a cul-de-sac. Scalze noted that in that instance it was the developers of the property whose own homes became corner lots. Scalze felt the City has a responsibility to citizens who bought property with reasonable expectations of not having a corner lot to protect these properties. Fahey disagreed and noted situations where there are large tracts of undeveloped lands adjacent. Fahey felt the Council has to balance the interests of the owners of large properties wishing to develop with those of the neighbors. Fahey noted the situation at hand with The Preserve and the proposal to develop this property without the need for a variance. Fahey questioned whether it was the City's right to say no road access to Viking Drive regardless of the impact on the development which would likely result in a 500 foot cul-de-sac that reduces the development potential of the property. Fahey pointed out that this City Council could opt for the 500-foot cul-de-sac, and a fixture City Council could allow another separate cul-de-sac to come in from Viking Drive to allow 9