My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_7499
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
07xxx
>
7400
>
res_7499
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:17:34 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 12:15:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
7499
Resolution Title
Rescinding Resolution No. 7489 Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. P-83-3
Resolution Date Passed
4/11/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />improvement was investigated by the engineering staff as a <br />result of the first petition and a study was done. We found <br />that the roadway was approximately 29 feet wide - as it stands <br />today - and a 60 foot right-of-way. It has less than 500 <br />vehicles a day. The pavement is in fair condition, reasonable <br />grades of between one and three percent for the most part. <br />The adjacent yards are a little higher than the centerline. <br />There are some trees along the right-of-way, but not very close <br />to the existing pavement. Some of the driveways are fairly <br />steep, ranging up to as much as 15%, and nearly all the drive- <br />ways conform to the code. <br /> <br />The proposed design is for what's called a standard <br />residential pavement. By that I mean it would be centered in <br />the right-of-way, it would be approximately 32 feet wide - that's <br />face of curb to face of curb. So that I can give you a feel <br />for what that means - if you could sort of imagine just <br />sitting a curb and gutter on the pavement on each side. <br />That's approximately what it would be like as far as width <br />and location. The investigation showed that we would <br />generally duplicate the existing pavement, but we would be <br />able to adjust it several inches in some cases to better <br />match some of the adjacent yards and driveways. It was found <br />that there would not be a need to remove any of the trees. <br />We would be able to replace the existing paved driveways and <br />we did also find one water service problem in the past that <br />we wanted to investigate because it had frozen in by-gone <br />years. <br /> <br />The improvement also includes the block of Iona from <br />Galtier to Matilda. This is due to our general policy of <br />doing side streets at the same time that the frontage streets <br />are done to avoid the problem of never having the side streets <br />taken care of. Part of that is becaus~ the assessment policy, <br />as it stands today, is that side yards - namely, all of those <br />homes that you see shaded along Iona - would be assessed for <br />ten percent of their frontage along Iona rather than the <br />normal frontage that they would have to pay if they were on <br />a regular frontage street, such as all the people along <br />G~ltier. The general City policy has also been to assess 25% <br />of the cost to the affected property owners along the road <br />and to take into account any odd lot conditions that exist, <br />although there are none in this particular project. <br /> <br />As far as the cost, the estimated cost of this project <br />is $119,270.17. It's estimated that 25% of that would be <br />assessed, which would result in an assessment cost for this <br />project alone at $11.72. Some of you that were at the <br />earlier hearing may recall that there are other streets in <br />the neighborhood that also were being considered and at the <br />time of the March 14 hearing, the Council consolidated this <br />project together with three other projects. with that <br />consolidation, the amount of the assessment was lowered <br />slightly to approximately $11.62. All of these are <br /> <br />-2- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.