Laserfiche WebLink
Chairperson Riley asked what a reasonable time period would be for staff to bring this back for <br />further discussion. <br />City Engineer Westby commented that he would request at least three months as there are a lot of <br />factors to consider, along with other factors such as staffing. <br />Councilmember Musgrove commented that seems ambitious with the activity for the first quarter. <br />She stated that perhaps six to nine months would be a better timeline. <br />It was the consensus that this item would return to the Committee within six months. <br />5.02: Consider Sound Wall Improvements East of Highway 47, North of Xkimo Street <br />City Engineer Westby reviewed the case and provided options the group could consider. <br />Chairperson Riley invited the resident present to address the Committee. <br />Mr. Blakely commented that there were emails between himself and City Engineer Westby after <br />the previous meeting when this was discussed. He stated that they noticed more noise after the <br />construction of Stoney River. He suggested that a hybrid option be considered that would block <br />the noise bouncing off the Stoney River building. <br />City Engineer Westby asked for clarification on his request. <br />Mr. Blakely identified the end of the existing wall. He stated that one of the proposals seemed to <br />end the noise wall at the arrow identified on the map, while the other would connect to the existing <br />wall on the other side. He suggested a length in between those two in order to buffer the noise that <br />bounces off Stoney River. <br />Councilmember Woestehoff asked if an opinion has been received from the City Attorney. <br />City Engineer Westby stated that he did explain the issue to the previous City Attorney, and it was <br />his opinion that the City would not be able to go back to the developer because the City reviewed <br />and approved the plans and that is what was constructed. He noted that the development agreement <br />did not include any other specifications on the noise wall. <br />Councilmember Woestehoff asked if the plans identified a six-foot wall or just identified a noise <br />barrier. <br />City Engineer Westby provided additional details on the plans that were drafted that matched the <br />design of the existing wall, including the height. He noted that there were no details in the plan <br />related to the height compared to the grade of the ground. <br />Councilmember Woestehoff suggested that the new City Attorney provide input as well. He stated <br />that if everyone's expectation was a noise wall, that is not what was provided. He stated that he <br />Public Works Committee / January 18, 2022 <br />Page 4 of 15 <br />