Minutes 1955 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

2 denied until plan lines can be set. There was no second to this motion. City Attorney Currie stated that a use permit had been granted to Mr. Duke setting forth certain con- ditions which Mr. Duke was willing to meet. The only question before the Council is to allow or disallow connection to the established sewer at the rear. Mr. Currie explained that the area recently annexed came into the City as "U" District and it was necessary that applicant secure a use permit. Councilman Britschgi then moved that Mr. Duke be denied the right to connect to the existing sewer pending report of the City Engineer as to the plan lines of the street at which time Mr. Duke could return and request his permit, seconded by Councilman Jones. Councilman Spillers offered amended motion to the effect that Mr. Duke be permitted to connect to the existing sewer subject to signing an agree- ment that would cover his share of the cost of assessment when new sewer line was install- ed. Councilman Royer stated that he would be willing to grant a permit providing Mr. Duke can set his house far enough back to fill the requirements of the Engineering Department. It was his thought that we should go along with Mr. Duke as was done in the previous case of Mr. Kohne. He then stated that he would second the motion providing that the City At- torney draw up the necessary agreement along the lines of the above. Councilman Granger suggested that the agreement cover the individual lot and subdivision and become a re- cordable document. This requirement was included in the motion. City Attorney also sug- gested that the motion include the necessary property for the future widening. City En- gineer questioned whether or not property owner could be assessed for new sewer lines un- less he were to connect to same. City Attorney replied that if he were allowed to connect to the existing sewer he should be expected to pay his share. After further discussion roll was called and the motion failed to carry. City Manager Rolison suggested that City Engineer and City Attorney get together and work out something to bring back to the City Council. Councilman Granger questioned whether or not any property owners could volun- tarily pay for the trunk sewer line in front of his property, to which City Attorney re- plied that he could not be legally required to do so but could pay on a voluntarily basis. In discussing again the possibility of Canyon Road being declared a major city street, City Engineer advised that such a project would not be considered by the State under the pre- sent fiscal year program. The original motion, as put by Councilman Britschgi, to the effect that temporary connection to the existing sewer be denied pending report. of City Engineer as to the proper layout of the street which motion was seconded by Councilman Jones was put to vote and carried on roll call, Mayor Herkner, Councilmen Royer and Spillers voting NO. In an effort to speed up the program Councilman Spillers suggested that an outside engineering firm make a survey inasmuch as there will probably be many requests for building permits in the near future. City Engineer Jain stated that his de- partment could drop what they are now doing and conduct the survey which would add consid- erable cost to the future assessment. The present cost of sewer is unknown due to the fact that sewers will go through private property and it will be necessary to secure many ease- ments. Councilman Granger offered his opinion to the effect that the City Council was try- ing to be fair and would submit their ideas to the state in an attempt to secure gas tax monies and if necessary borrow from other funds to help out. Councilman Britschgi was of the opinion that Mr. Jain might be able to make a preliminary survey and report back in a few weeks. Mr. Jain promised to do whatever possible to speed up this matter. Councilman Britschgi moved that this entire matter be set up for study at the study meeting of Janu- ary 19th, seconded by Councilman Royer and carried.