My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-14-2012 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
03-14-2012 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2012 2:47:51 PM
Creation date
3/22/2012 2:47:35 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />MARCH 14, 2012 <br />ORDER <br />FEASIBILITY <br />REPORT — <br />COUNTY <br />ROAD B -2 <br />ACCESS <br />DRIVE <br />The City Administrator reported that there is a long driveway access from <br />County Road B -2 East serving properties at 735, 739, 743, and 751 <br />County Road B -2 East. This driveway access is showing wear and the <br />abutting property owners have expressed concern about the impact of <br />garbage trucks on the driveway. While road restrictions are on, Allied <br />Waste will be sending in a small pick -up unit to collect garbage and <br />recycling. However, the abutting property owners are looking for a long- <br />term solution. In a recent meeting that staff held with three of the four <br />property owners, the discussion was for the City to improve the driveway <br />access and take it over as a City street. The Administrator noted that two <br />of the property owners have submitted petitions requesting the road <br />improvement, but one of these property owners owns the property that the <br />driveway easement runs over, and is asking for consideration be paid him <br />for the property. The Administrator indicated that a petition must be <br />submitted by 35% of the impacted property owners in order for the City to <br />act on it. Petitions from two of the property owners constitute 50 %, but <br />the Administrator stated that given the conditions that one of the petitions <br />contains, he would not feel comfortable recommending that the City order <br />the feasibility report. The Administrator stated that he would like a <br />petition from at least one more property owner requesting the <br />improvement before ordering the feasibility report. The Administrator <br />noted that in proceeding with a road improvement and assessing costs, the <br />City must be concerned with the issue of benefits received. <br />Keis asked if the project would involve a complete reconstruction. The <br />City Administrator indicated that given the limited available land, he <br />would assume that the improvement would have to be a rural section <br />street. The City Engineer would evaluate the extent of an improvement as <br />part of the feasibility study. The Administrator also suggested that if a <br />project moves forward, the City may want to require Waivers of Right to <br />Appeal Special Assessments from the benefitted property owners. <br />Keis asked the timing of a project. The Administrator indicated that the <br />project could not be hid with the 2012 Improvements, but it may be <br />possible to add it in as a change - order. The Administrator reported that <br />the property owners would like to resolve the situation this year. The <br />Administrator again stated that he would like to have three of the four <br />property owners submit petitions before moving forward. <br />The Administrator reviewed the specifics of a potential improvement, <br />noting that the driveway would be improved running north and south. A <br />turn - around would be placed at the end of the north /south segment to <br />allow a garbage truck to turn around. The east /west segment would <br />remain private and maintained by the abutting property owners. <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.