Agenda - Council - 02/14/2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

1) Discuss Potential Improvements to Garnet Street NW, located within NOW AND THEN ESTATES City Engineer Himmer reviewed the staff report and advised that eight of the 13 residents contacted said they preferred the City patch the road and wait for the new road financing system. Mayor Ramsey noted eight residents would be a majority to stop a project so there was no need to advance the project at this point. Councilmember Wise concurred and stated until a policy is in place for road maintenance, he believed any reconstruction can be delayed because other residents will feel the same. He asked whether this will cause problems with overlay projects. City Engineer Himmer explained there had been no sealcoats or overlays so the residents felt the City had not properly maintained this road and should correct that situation. He stated he had pointed out to the residents that they were also not assessed for such projects. City Engineer Himmer advised that because the road has deteriorated to the point of needing reconstruction, it would not make financial sense to consider an overlay and he would not recommend installation of a utility pipe without road reconstruction. Gary Smith, 16821 Garnet Street NW, stated Nowthen was developed on 2.5-acre lots so it makes no sense to extend utilities. He explained his septic system is in the rear yard so connecting to the street would cost $20,000 to $30,000 plus connection fees. He lives next to the Brookfield Addition and asked what happens with density transitioning when people want to subdivide their 2.5-acre lot. Mr. Smith agreed that some storm sewer improvements are needed but if the City wants sanitary sewer, water, and sidewalks installed, the City should pay for it. He noted that in 30-40 years a developer may buy the whole area and redevelop. At that point, sewer and water could be installed. Councilmember Backous agreed with Councilmember Wise that this problem will come up repeatedly because residents are aware there is a looming solution to fund road projects. However, he didn't think projects should be pushed off because it will be more expensive over time to make the repairs and the City may be unable to handle a large accumulation of projects. He supported reconstructing the road and when the Council approves a financing plan, the benefiting properties would then be in the same position as anyone else. Councilmember Backous supported developing a transition plan. Councilmember McGlone asked if residents can petition against the entire project, if utilities are installed, when residents are only being asked to pay for the paving. City Attorney Goodrich stated residents would petition against the amount they would be assessed. City Engineer Himmer explained that curb and gutter, sidewalks, and erosion control are part of the road and resident's 50% contribution. City Council Work Session / January 10, 2012 Page 2 of 13