08-10-94 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 10, 1994 Road wall is the City's responsibility, and technically is part of the street improvement project. However, the argument could be made that the cost of this wall was not assessed against the benefiting property owners since it was not part of the 8~~ and 3" formula. If there are other walls that exist, they could be a liability to the City depending on the circumstances. Desai reported that he was not here this evening on behalf of any homeowners' association, but just representing himself. Desai reported that any Dianna Lane homeowners' association is primarily a social organization and not a formal organization. The City Administrator reported that his interpretation of the 1980 resolution was that the Dianna Lane retaining walls were not accepted in that the resolution adopted was dealing with acceptance of the public improvements. The retaining walls were not part of the public improvement, and were added by someone after the street was put in. Scalze stated that this was her recollection of the situation. The City Administrator reported that the original plans for the area show steep slopes which were probably not realistic to maintain. Morelan asked if the retaining walls were located on the public right-of-way. The City Administrator replied that it appears that at least a portion of the retaining walls are on public right-of-way, if not all. The area has not been surveyed, however. Morelan asked from a safety issue how much liability the City was exposed to. The City Attorney replied that the location of the walls relative to the right-of-way is not known, and even if the walls are located on right-of-way, they do not necessarily become City property. The Attorney pointed out that the City did not construct the retaining walls and does not necessarily own them. However, the Attorney advised that the City make sure its insurance coverage covers these walls. 9