The city council has given final approval to one subdivision and preliminary approval to a second on 104th South, but officials want the project developers to move forward immediately with street improvements so that a planned resurfacing project in August will not be affected.

Given final approval was Cherry Hill No. 2, an extension of an existing subdivision at 2480 W. 104th South. The new phase will have 12 lots and cover about 4.7 acres. The project is being developed by McDougal/Olsen Construction. A third phase to the subdivision is planned at a later date.In granting final approval the council stipulated that the developers turn 15 shares of water in the Utah County Canal Company to the city for use in a secondary water system for the subdivision. The council agreed to a request from the developers that an agreement be signed in conjunction with the water issue to assure property owners that the water will not be diverted from the subdivision to other areas of the city. The developers said they have been working with city officials concerning the 104th South resurfacing plan and believe their off-site curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements will be completed in time to prevent disruption to the road project.

Preliminary approval was given to the Country Park subdivision planned at 26th West and 104th South. The development will contain 17 lots and cover about seven acres. Developer Jim Jenkins said he too believes improvements abutting his development can be completed in time to aid the resurfacing project.

He balked, however, when council members asked if he would be willing to include the curb, guttering and sidewalk along a 200-foot strip between the proposed subdivision and a convenience store at 26th West and 104th South.

The city wants the 200-foot strip improved so that there will be no interruption in the improvements and the road surfacing project. Mayor Theron B. Hutchings said having the improvements put in now would substantially reduce future problems regarding road maintenance.

The property in question is not part of the proposed subdivision and Jenkins noted it would cost him about $2,000 for the requested improvements. He said he does not know if he could recover that cost from the present property owner.

A spokesman for the property owner said his client is willing to pipe a ditch across the property but is not economically able to put in the other improvements. He said, however, the owner may give favorable consideration to a suggestion that he pay for the curb, gutters and sidewalk across the property if the city picks up the cost of extending the pavement from the existing roadway to abut with the proposed curbs.

Hutchings and Councilwoman Merlynn Newbold wanted to approve the subdivision on the condition the improvement issues are resolved. Councilman Bob Mascaro noted that was not possible since Jenkins does not own the property and it would not be legal to tie approval of his subdivision to improvements on property he does not control.

The council finally approved the preliminary plan on a 3-1 vote with Newbold opposed.

Later in the meeting it was reported that Jenkins had met with the property owner's representative and it appears a solution may be in the works, including the installation of storm sewers into the property to prevent the need for cutting the road in the future. That agreement would be subject to future council discussion and approval.

The resurfacing project is slated for the end of August and city officials are working with affected property owners to try and get all improvements along the road installed prior to the start of the project. Officials hope this effort will result in fewer cuts into the resurfaced road when it is completed.