Agenda - Council - 07/13/2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE # 1 i OS CONSIDER DRIVEWAY APRON PAVING POLICY By: Tim Himmer, City Engineer Background: Staff is seeking direction on how to address driveway aprons/approaches on future dirt street paving and street reconstruction projects. Street paving projects involve existing driveways which vary in completeness; from an unimproved surface consisting of dirt and/or class 5, to an improved condition consisting of concrete, bituminous, or pavers. Historically City paving projects have treated the individual driveways as the responsibility of the property owners. Driveways were replaced as a project cost only when the existing driveway needed to be removed and replaced to adjust for alignment and/or grade of the new street section. Existing driveways that did not initially extend to the road surface in an improved condition were not connected to the new street edge as a part of the project. Following the Welcomes Road paving project, a property owner approached the Public Works Committee at their meeting on November 20, 2007 and suggested that the lack of connecting drives to the new roadway made the project appear incomplete. The Council approved the Committee recommendation that future feasibility studies for paving projects include the cost of paving a distance 10 feet beyond the edge of the roadway, but it was not clear on how this would be paid for. Should this cost be charged to the property owner that receives the direct benefit for paving a portion of their driveway, or should it be a cost that is absorbed by the project and funded 50% by assessments to all property owners within the project limits and 50% by City participation? Observations: Since setting this policy staff has prepared three feasibility studies for dirt street paving projects and is currently redrafting one of them (Chameleon Street) for a potential project in 2011. In these studies the driveway apron was identified to be extended to the right of way line, which may deviate slightly from the 10 foot distance specified by policy, as an additional charge to the benefiting property owner. • The Ute Street project (IP 08-33) is set to be paved next month and the apron length specified in the feasibility study was 13 feet, which is the distance from the curb and gutter to the end of the 10 foot drainage and utility easement, to be paid directly by the benefited property owner. There are four unimproved driveways which are affected by this issue on the project. The remaining driveways are improved and currently extend to the existing street; they will be cut and matched into the new roadway and replacement will be included as a project cost. • The 151s~ and 152"d Avenues, and Fluorine Street paving project (IP 08-34) is planned for construction later this summer, and the paved apron distance specified in the feasibility study for this project was to the property line; a distance of approximately 19 feet, to be paid directly by the benefited property owner. • The redrafted Chameleon Street feasibility study incorporates the City policy and proposes to install paved aprons out to 10 feet beyond the roadway as a separate cost to be paid directly by the benefited property owner. Attached to this case are examples that illustrate when an apron installation would result in an additional cost to the property owner.