My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/05/2009
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2009
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/05/2009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 9:59:49 AM
Creation date
1/30/2009 9:45:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
02/05/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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
<br />Mr. Olson stated that their assessment numbers would not change whether there is a <br />sidewalk or not - that is the City's cost. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated he is not sure he has a grasp on what the Northfork <br />community wants. <br /> <br />Mr. Olson stated that 35 out of 67 benefitting property owners were opposed to the <br />sidewalks. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen asked how many want sidewalks to which Mr. Olson replied he <br />did not know. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen estimated that could be pretty close to half not wanting it. He <br />questioned if this could be tabled to pose that question to the individual homeowners. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that to be clear about this the petition and the four bullets <br />in this case - property owners would be assessed. The sidewalks were added by the City <br />Council last year. That part of the project will not be assessed, the petitioning will not <br />have a legal effect on the sidewalk. It is not forcing the City Council to do anything. <br />Council could direct, for example, that staff send out a letter to ask if the residents are in <br />favor of a sidewalk or not and the citizens could take a petition and ask their neighbors if <br />they are in favor or not. <br /> <br />Councilmember Wise asked for clarification if the funding source comes from the MSA <br />funds and could they be used for other road projects to which Mr. Olson replied yes. <br /> <br />Mayor Ramsey stated that the consensus is that we should include sidewalks and he <br />would be in agreement with that. This would give clear direction to Northfork - maybe <br />we should send out a mailer asking for a simple yes or no and, at that time, he would cast <br />his vote for the majority. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated he would be in favor of sidewalks. We looked at $4,500 <br />assessments early on to upgrade the road. These property owners would get a $1,700 <br />assessment in lieu of $4,500 and sidewalks - that is a "heck of a deal". This would be a <br />9-ton road and a sidewalk and it is not a $4,500 assessment. Councilmember Look <br />reiterated he would favor sidewalks and would appreciate the opinion from the residents. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that he has not make up his mind yet but appreciates <br />Councilmember Jeffi..ey's concerns about public safety. He stated he would like the <br />Northforkcommunity to do some "soul searching" - this is a $1,700 amenity. He spoke <br />to the property owners saying they could debate it more and contact Councilmembers <br />with your thoughts. He added that he thought there was a Council consensus, even <br />without his vote, leaning heavy toward sidewalks. <br /> <br />City Council/January 13, 2009 <br />Page 9 of31 <br /> <br />PS9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.