Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br />April 14, 2020 <br />Page 4 <br />1 of and will be setting up electric vehicle charges at the City's Well House Number Five, near the <br />2 tennis courts so those residents will be able to park there and charge their vehicles. Regarding the <br />3 retaining wall, the City has plans to replace it for this project. He noted the exact dollar amount <br />4 staff is not one hundred percent sure but will be around the $50,000 range for that wall and pretty <br />5 expensive. Currently it is a two-tier retaining wall and each tier is approximately three to four <br />6 feet so the new wall will be somewhere around that at six to eight feet high and will be a single <br />7 retaining wall. In regard to the fence, the City is not proposing to do a traditional split rail fence <br />8 or black chain link or vinyl fence, the City really wants to mimic what is on Silver Lake Road <br />9 with the wall and fencing. <br />10 <br />11 Ms. Noelle Noyes indicated in the presentation there was something about there had to be <br />12 something in writing at this meeting and she wondered how that worked given that they are not, <br />13 as a group, present at the meeting. Mr. Messner explained if the residents would like to appeal <br />14 their assessment then the resident would need to sign a written intent of appeal and deliver that to <br />15 City offices. If the resident wished to do that the resident could either sign it at the meeting and <br />16 request to do so or a written notice can be sent to City Hall that the resident intends to appeal and <br />17 is something that can be done through email. If the resident does intend to appeal, signing a <br />18 notice does not mean that the appeal is a done process. The resident still needs to file the appeal <br />19 to the County Courthouse within thirty days of the adoption of the assessment role and the <br />20 resident would need to hire an attorney and go through the appeal process after filing at the <br />21 County Courthouse. <br />22 <br />23 Ms. Noelle Noyes explained that given the extraordinary nature of what is going on right now, <br />24 the Pandemic and impacts on the economy and people's health, etc., she was a bit surprised that <br />25 none of that has been brought up in terms of assessing the potential impact of this under <br />26 completely changed circumstances from when the project was first brought up and talked about. <br />27 She knew that people in the neighborhood have been furloughed already and there is a lot of <br />28 unemployment and it is unclear whether or not that is going to improve or not so it is somewhat <br />29 surprising to her in a disappointing way that there has not been some sort of more at least <br />30 information discussion about the potential impacts of the new situation on this pretty large cost <br />31 of thirteen to nineteen thousand dollars if paid as a part of taxes. <br />32 <br />33 Ms. Sara Atwood indicated the City came out and marked where an easement is going to be on <br />34 her property and it is quite a large chunk of her property and she is not able to put anything on <br />35 the easement, such as the shed her family want there and indicated the easement will really <br />36 impact their land and what can be enjoyed. Mr. Messner explained the wall itself is on the <br />37 property line and the purpose of the easement is for the construction of the retaining wall and for <br />38 the installation of the storm sewer that needs to be replaced. There is an existing storm sewer in <br />39 Ms. Atwood's yard in that location and that line needs to be replaced because it is failing, and the <br />40 side of the embankment is washing out and needs to be repaired. These are improvements that <br />41 are necessary for the project. If the line is replaced the City is asking that a proper easement over <br />42 that is placed in order to access and maintain it. He noted Ms. Atwood is still allowed to place a <br />43 shed on that easement which he did explain in an email to her husband on that. The only thing <br />44 not allowed would be a permanent structure. He noted the easement is only ten feet wide on the <br />45 property line so by City Code they would not be able to put a permanent structure within that <br />46 distance anyway due to City setbacks for structures. <br />