Agenda - Council - 10/14/2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Two property owners commented of their desire to see water and sewer included in the improvements. A pravlous feasibility study conducted in 2009 included sewer and water as an option, 'his previous project was rejected b*v petition, Properties close to the existing sanitary sewer on the frontage road could be polled to see whether it is feasible to extend sewer and water to a poerion of the project area, The closure of the 152"4 access onto T1447 was opposed by most property owners in attendance, Residents noted that southbound trafric turning into theneighborhood at the remaining access at 1491h Avenue would need to make a U turn, This U turn is made difficult by the narrow width and close proximity of the service road to the highway, Residents also noted that during the morning peak hour backups occur due to volume and inability of vehicles to properly align themselves to make the desired turn, After reviewing these comments and observing the intersection staff concurs with the residents and recommends that the closure of 1 S2"ie Ave at TH 47 be eliminated from the improvements, * The connection of 152"d Avenue to HeliumStreet was supported in the comments of two property owners but was opposed by the rn�Qrity of those in attendance, 114 is the stated goal of the City to connect neighborhoods and 1S2'0 Street was stubbed lo within 140 feet of the existing dirt sh edt for this purpose. Staff recommends that this element of tho project remain in the proposed Improvements because it is consisteent with stated City planning policy, • Concern was a'xpressed over trot loss associated with the storm water outfall into the wetland Maff will review the alternatives for the storax water outfall including,, directional boring; relocating the outfall to an alternate location, obtaining a wider easement to avoid impact to the trees, Evaluation of a suggested alternative to discharge the storm water west into the adjacent system has been evaluated and rejected as not possible because that system is several feet higher than the lowest portion of the street to be drained, One property owner questioned the validity of assessing the corner lots on the intersections of 15 1" Ave and 152,d ,avenue and the frontage road. The road adjacent to these properties would be widened from 20 feet to 28 feet and then receive a wear course overlay opposed to a completely new base and surface course as the remaining project, Propartigs along the frontage road,have never been asamsed for the pavement in place on 1S1" Ave and 1 S2"" Ave, The paveinent an 152"'l was placed in .1996 in cor{junction with, the sanitary sewer project and thane is no record of the installation of the pavement on 131' Ave, These eVisting pavcments are, in good condition, Theme does not appear to be a past pre rodent far addressing this particular situation, Staff racotnmonds retaining an e;qutal'asse:ssment based on fronting footage similar to the other properties, ,41ternately, a reduced assessment far those parcels might be considered. —116—