Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council :Minutes <br />June 18,2007 <br /> <br />Page 14 <br /> <br />MOTION CARRIED 5-0. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />7.1. Private Roads <br /> <br />Ms. Johnson provided the background information for this request as outlined in her staff <br />report. She stated the roads are private because the developers requested private roads so <br />they could get more density and not have to comply with city street standards. She further <br />stated that the association documents for these developments clearly state that the residents <br />are responsible for all costs of maintaining and repairing the private roads. The residents <br />would have received this information when purchasing a townhome on a private road. <br /> <br />Arthur Jackett, 19045 Xavier Street-Stated Ms. Johnson's explanation of the city's costs and <br />responsibility if it were to take over private roads was well done. He requested the city create <br />an informative flyer explaining this issue to residents. He stated townhome representative <br />Bill Saaranen is concerned about the taxes he pays but that he doesn't receive any benefit <br />from the city for road maintenance. <br /> <br />Ms. Johnson suggested information in an upcoming newsletter. <br /> <br />Mr. Hals questioned how much of the private roads residents are requesting the city take <br />over due to the layout of the streets in the townhome developments. He stated it would cost <br />about $160-175,000 for a special truck to plow these roads due to there narrow size. Mr. <br />Hals stated an entirely new snowplow route would be created which would take extra <br />staffing. He stated maintenance costs would be about $15,000 per mile for sealcoating and <br />some areas would need an overlay improvement, which would cost about $200,000 per mile. <br />He stated the private roads would be expensive for the city to take over. He questioned the <br />Council where the city would stop with taking over private roads (private gravel and <br />commercial roads). <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Ed Wortman, 19121 King Court (Elk Run Village)-Stated he doesn't understand how his <br />road could be considered private because of statements in the contractors agreement. <br /> <br />Mr. Maurer explained that the city owns the sewer and water in the developments and has <br />easements over the road in order to be able to perform routine maintenance. He stated there <br />is no public right-of-way in the-developments. He stated the city does not own the storm <br />sewer or the street in the development. <br /> <br />Mr. Beck stated the city does not own the land the streets are located on upon. <br /> <br />Mr. Wortman stated he pays high taxes and association fees and questioned what he gets for <br />the expenses. He stated he doesn't get street lights or road maintenance. He stated the city <br />accepted the improvements that were made on these roads by the developer and questioned <br />why the standards are different than the city public road standards. He questioned if it were <br />possible for the city to make some type of adjustment to assist residents in townhome <br />developments. He also requested the Council change the standards required for private <br />roads. <br /> <br />Councilmember Farber stated the townhome development is a beautiful project compared <br />to what the developer originally requested to develop. He stated residents need to work with <br />the State in order to get any type of tax credit. <br /> <br />. <br />