Laserfiche WebLink
COUNCIL MEETING <br />JUNE 11, 1990 <br />request and noted that concrete curbs and gutters and street <br />lights cannot be supported by rationale. <br />Jim Katzung, 2220 Reiling Road, noted that he does live on <br />Lot 31. Although about 65 feet of his frontage would be <br />affected by the extension of Reiling Road, he feels that it <br />would not benefit him at all since his lot cannot be <br />subdivided. He did not see how he could be assessed on this <br />lot. Mr. Katzung also noted that he owns Lot 30. He noted <br />that soil conditions on this lot are such that the lot is <br />unbuildable and therefore he did not see how he could be <br />assessed on this lot. He noted that if there is no benefit, <br />he cannot be assessed. <br />Mr. Katzung also questioned the need for concrete curb and <br />gutter and street lights. <br />Mayor Bisel said he was concerned about the project schedule <br />and noted that there is still a law suit pending on Reiling <br />Road. He said he is concerned about who would be selected to <br />do the work. <br />Mr. Katzung said that those proposed to be assessed still do <br />not know what the individual costs will be. He noted that no <br />appraisals of the property have been completed and he also <br />said that he felt the larger lots should have a large portion <br />of the assessment. <br />Mr. Strand said he was only interested in seeing that Reiling <br />Road is constructed past his lot. <br />Mr. Prokop gave a brief background on how Deer Pass Trail was <br />constructed. He noted that the Council has already <br />established a precedent for varying from the requirement of <br />concrete curbs and gutters and street lights. Mr. Prokop <br />also explained that Astronomy classes for School District <br />#624 are conducted in the area, and street lights would <br />present a problem for the class. <br />Council Member Bohjanen moved to close the public hearing at <br />8:20 P.M. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. <br />Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Schumacher explained that <br />the proposed improvement is not in the sixty (60) day waiting <br />period. This allows all affected property owners to petition <br />against the improvement if they so desire. <br />Mr. Smith said that all will petition against the improvement <br />unless the Council makes a decision regarding whether or not <br />to delete the requirement for concrete curbs, gutters and <br />street lights. He asked if there was no other option. Mr. <br />Schumacher explained that the City Engineer has presented his <br />proposal based on the current City Improvement Policy. The <br />Council cannot take action until after the sixty (60) day <br />waiting period. Mr. Hawkins explained that the Council can <br />PAGE 5 <br />