Laserfiche WebLink
MINUT~S <br />City Counci.l <br />Sept. 26, 1954 <br />Road Issue <br />(Cont.) <br />Nlr. 7.ilge r.eported titat many Uusinesses would lilce to add on, UuC <br />reali.ze they cannot: until a second access i.s brought into the area< <br />7i.l.~;e asked if Che road were approved~ if the businesses would be <br />a].lowed to add one <br />Mrs. Scalze asked if some type of agreement coulrl be worlced out <br />that it Che businesses agree to an assessment f.or. the road and the <br />busi_ness is soLd, that the assessment ~aould sti.11 stay with Che <br />property. Dlr. Pahey suf;~;ested that t:he Attorney loolc i.nto the <br />possibi.l.i.ty of. a covenant that woulcl run with the property. <br />x4r. 7.i1p,e stated that the businesses would be in f.avor of 33 feet <br />of roadway. Mr. Fahey stated [hat he could not buy this in an <br />industrial park. <br />The I:ngineer i.ndi.cated that the ri.~;ht-o£-way could be cut docon to <br />50 f.eet due to the rai.l.road ri,n,ht-of-way in the ar.ea, The blaclctop <br />woul.<1 be 32 feet wide. <br />Mr. Pahey poi.nted out that alternati.ve fi.ve shows a 50 fooC road. <br />Mr. Pat~ey suggested that the Engi.neer loolc into Che feasiUility of <br />altexnative ~~~i. <br />h1rs. Scalze aslced i.E the Ci.ty could draw up a contract that all the <br />busi.nesses would share in the cost of the construction of the road. <br />Mr. Carl.ey sta[ed that this could be done and pointed out tk~at it is <br />si.mil.ar to ~ohat the City di.d i.n the case of Sl.eepy ktollow. <br />Mrs. Scalze stated that it would have to r.un with the property as Che <br />road may not be buiit ri-ght acoay. <br />Mr. 7i.lge commented that t:he businesses do not want the road, buC <br />Icnoca that they need it i.f. they coish to expand. <br />Nirs. Scalz.e i.nCroduced Che Eo1low:ing resolution and moved iCS a<loption: <br />RFSOLilTIO\ ~;0. 84-9-435 - DI};ECTING TIIE CITY <br />1:NGINETR TO LOOSC AT f~LTfiRNATIVfi 7'/~5 FOR STR~tiT, <br />SErd~R AND WATER TO SERVICIi THF. INDUSTRIAL PA12K <br />AND GIVS TtIE COIJNCIL A PPASI~IILI'I'Y REPORT AND <br />COST ST11DY <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by P1rs. Nardinie <br />Ayes (4) Sct~lze, Nardi.ni, Fahey, Porsberg. <br />Nayes (0)< <br />ResoluC:ion declared adopted. <br />Thi.s resolution appears in Resol.ution Aooi< No. ].1., page 449. <br />Page -11- <br />