Laserfiche WebLink
<br />· The scope of required paving to. be enforced, including the options of .15 to 21 feet and <br />100 feet <br />· Paving being. required on a determined length with problem properties tagged for <br />additional paving to. be required . <br />'. Public purpose and aesthetic improvements associated with the paving requirement <br />· Possibility of a two. pronged approach in identifying the problem properties and <br />launching a voluntary program , <br />· Incentive of the City paymg for the first 21 feet of paving with the ability for the property <br />.owner to have the remaining desired portion done and paid through assessments on the <br />tax roll ' <br />· Savings m Citycosts from reduced street sweeping and cleaning of the storm sewers <br /> <br />Chairperson Elvig suggested: staff determine the number of driveways that wculd be involved . <br />with this type of program. He suggested staff present the Committee with options for a program, <br />cost estimate.s and funding sources. . <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson indicated a.drivewayco~t can be determined by aerial photos. A <br />. list will be prepared and incl~ded on the agenda of the next Committee meeting. <br /> <br />Councihnember Dehen suggested the possibility of an ordinance that would require the paving to <br />be completed by a certain date. He noted the City would not want to be involved with liability <br />issues associated with things such as utility lines being cut by the contractor. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson noted one option would be for the City to hire a contractor and run <br />an cverall program as was done in Coon Rapids. Another opticn would be to offer property <br />owners payment for the cost to. pave the required portion of the driveway. This option would <br />eliminate .the City's involvement with waivers and liabilities. . <br /> <br />Chairperson E1vig asked if there are any reasons currently that pr9perty .owners are. not required <br />to pave their driveways. . . <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski replied City Code requires driveways to be paved. <br /> <br />Chairperson ElVig questioned if seccndary driveways that are currently class 5 would be required <br />to be paved. " <br /> <br />Public Works Supervisor Reimer noted dirt from those. driveways runs onto the roads as well. <br />fie pointed out there are also driveways with a negative slope. . <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen noted there are many ways for individuals to redirect w~ter. <br /> <br />Motion by Chairperson Elvig, seconded by Councilmember Dehen, to direct staff to bring back a <br />recommendation to the Committee on a driveway paving program based on the above discussion. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen requested further information regarding the Cocn Rapids incentive <br />program and the. enforcement of the ordinance with the next discussion of the program. <br /> <br />Public Works Committee I April 17, 2007 <br />. Page 16 of 18 <br />