My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-09-2015 Council Packet
>
City Council Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
11-09-2015 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2015 4:02:20 PM
Creation date
11/23/2015 3:47:17 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1VXINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JUNE 27, 2001 <br />Scalze pointed out that Allen Avenue is a public street and is maintained by the <br />City, However, the cul-de-sacs are private and there is inadequate right-of- <br />way to turn them into public streets and still have conforming setbacks. <br />La'Valle pointed out that it was typical to have private street in a townholne <br />development, He noted that street maintenance costs in these instances are <br />handled as part of association dues just as grass cutting costs, <br />Helgeson pointed out that Park View Coup was put in as a public street <br />because the City has seen the error of its ways with the private street situation. <br />Helgeson asked that out of fairness to the Pitrina. l?arl< property owners the City <br />take the responsibility for the'Pitrina Sark cul-de-sacs, lielgeson felt that the <br />City needed to took out for its citizens rlot for developers. <br />Scalze pointed out that it was clear from the onset that the developer did not <br />warp the cul -de -sans as public strects, Scalze suggested that when the property <br />owners purchased their townhomes they could have checked with the City on <br />the ownership of the cul-de-sacs, <br />Helgeson reported that lie has the documents that were given to him at the time <br />lie purchased his townhoâ–ºne. He indicated that there is nothing in these <br />documents indicating that the cul-de-sacs we're private streets. <br />Scalze felt that that was an issue between the property owners and the <br />developer. <br />Anderson pointed out that when a development is proposed, the City has no <br />way of knowing; who the ultimate buyers will be in order to obtain input from <br />them. Tile City relied on the developer to communicate what he wanted to <br />build, and the purchasers of the townhome units should have been informed <br />about the conditions under which they were buying. If the developer did not <br />,given notice of those conditions, they the purchasers may have an action with <br />the developer. Anderson pointed out that the City's responsibility is to make <br />certain the codes are met. If the City takes actions after the fact that result in <br />non-compliance with codes, no one will come in and expect: to be held to <br />compliance. <br />Fahoy suggested that the City could have required in the development <br />agreement that as a condition of approval purchasers be notified that the cul- <br />de-sacs are private and maintenance costs are the responsibility of the <br />homeowners association. Fahey felt there May have been a problem with <br />communication between the developer and the homeowners. <br />Scalze felt that the City's function was to set policy and follow the code, not to <br />tell developers what to communicate to their future purchasers, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.