Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Elvig stated this is a prime area for future growth and utility funds are strong so <br />the City could do that. He supported installing road with curb and gutter to standards, including <br />utilities and to split the cost on road construction. <br />Chairperson McGlone suggested putting more emphasis on the fact that this road was at <br />reconstruction condition five years ago so it should be moved ahead over anything else. <br />Councilmember Elvig stated this road project was previously held off because, in reasonable <br />views, the growth was going to happen. <br />Chairperson McGlone noted 12 owners could divide their property once sewer and water are <br />installed and may decide to sell off a lot to pay for the assessment/connection. <br />Councilmember Elvig agreed the project would create the opportunity for growth. <br />Public Works Director Olson noted this is identical to the situation five years ago with 151st <br />Avenue and Fluorine Street. The City would have put in sewer and water and assessed for one- <br />half the cost of the road and curb and gutter. However, the residents indicated they did not want <br />to subdivide their property and would counter petition the project. He agreed that Garnet Street <br />is past due and is expensive to maintain. <br />Councilmember Elvig stated another condition at that time was residents thought they would be <br />required to connect to sewer and water so it became contentious. He suggested staff talk with the <br />Garnet Street property owners to assure them that is not the case and eliminate the fear factor. <br />Chairperson McGlone stated he would have no objection to the full project including curbs and <br />gutters. He noted the City cannot force anyone to connect but some may want to subdivide. <br />This is part of the road reconstruction initiative. He asked about sidewalks to connect 167tn <br />Avenue. <br />Councilmember Elvig agreed this neighborhood requires sidewalks, which would be a huge <br />benefit. <br />City Engineer Himmer reviewed a sketch depicting 40 lots, noting there is no guarantee that <br />would happen, but it would bring assessments down to the $3,000 to $4,000 range. <br />Public Works Director Olson asked for input on assessments. He noted that if proposing a <br />project with assessments, the first thing the neighborhood will ask is what if the City goes to a <br />zero assessment the next year. Public Works Director Olson stated he has already heard that <br />comment from property owners with recent sealcoating or overlay assessments but he believed <br />those projects were differentiable. He noted this project would involve a full reconstruct but was <br />constructed in 1988, not 40 years ago. He explained this project involves a clay area so a sand <br />base was put in but not constructed to the subbase requirement. He raised the alternative of <br />charging 25% or 50%, holding a public hearing, and agreeing that if the street reconstruction <br />initiative is approved with 100% paid from a franchise fee, they would be reimbursed. <br />Public Works Committee / November 15, 2011 <br />Page 11 of 15 <br />