Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />March 4, 1987 <br />There was no one from the general public wishing to comment further <br />on this portion of Improvement No. 87 -1. <br />The next area of consideration was the improvement of Soo Lane by <br />street construction and watermain. Blesener pointed out that the <br />cost of these improvements is approximately $60,000. <br />Scalze asked the type of street planned. <br />The Engineer replied that the street would include curb and gutter <br />and terminate at the southern edge of the Roseville Plumbing <br />property with no cul -de -sac at the end. The Donovan and Roseville <br />Plumbing properties would bear the assessment for this improvement. <br />The Engineer also reported that he is proposing another 10 -foot <br />easement along the east side of the existing right -of -way, <br />however, the road would be placed as far towards the railroad <br />right -of -way as possible within the easement. <br />Greg Deeb asked the cost of curb and gutter. <br />The Engineer estimated the cost at between $6.50 and $7.00 per <br />front foot with 1,000 lineal feet being required. <br />Fahey asked if curb and gutter could be added at a later date. <br />The Engineer replied that this was difficult to do and pointed out <br />that during the construction process, curb and gutter are set and <br />then blacktop installed to match the curb and gutter. <br />Deeb stated that he was opposed to the road even without the <br />curb and gutter improvements. Deeb also pointed out that A. C. <br />Black will have difficulty manuevering trucks on his property <br />if curb and gutter are installed. <br />Fahey pointed out that the ordinance prohibits development of a <br />property without road frontage, and that the Deeb and Donovan <br />properties are non - conforming under the ordinance. Fahey felt <br />that the City cannot grant a different privilege to Deeb and <br />Donovan that it does not grant to anyone else. <br />Deeb pointed out that the issue of the road was originally brought <br />up because of access across the railroad tracks. This has been <br />resolved, and now the issue is fire protection. <br />Fahey stated that he was willing to defer to the judgement of the <br />Fire Marshall with regard to access for fire protection, but he <br />was not willing to allow the expansion of the non - conformities <br />without a public road. Fahey felt the businesses could continue <br />as is as long as the Fire Marshall agreed, and the City would not <br />force the issue of the road. <br />Page 7 <br />