2021-04-27_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Culver indicated staff needed to present a couple of more segments before the meeting is over for the Commission to give feedback on. Mr. David Booms, 300 South McCarron's Boulevard, explained he wanted to talk about Mr. Anderson's comments, specifically to access. The one photo he showed was a stairway leading down to South McCarron's was taken from his property. He indicated they are roughly 36 feet above the south McCarron's. He noted he has lived in the area since 1995 and that road, the alley way has been used by the residents routinely. The road is the most common way to get to their property. He explained his pontoon is parked in the back along with having a shed in the back. He stated they are also having some work done now with their roof as well as working on the deck and all of the materials being used are being brought up the back using the street pathway. He wanted to affirm that the residents do maintain the back area Member Cicha asked if putting a pathway in their limit access for the homeowners. He wondered what would stop the residents from using the pathway. Mr. Culver explained once this becomes a pathway then the primary user is the pedestrian or person on a bicycle and from a safety perspective the City cannot have that mix of traffic on a regular basis. If a person is using a pathway they are not expecting a car to be on the pathway. The City does have some rules about that, and the Parks Department actually does have some provisions for allowing occasional access via a pathway to a rear portion of an adjacent property owners property for maintenance purposes or something like that, but there are rules, and the resident has to ask permission. This would not be an open access at that point and not something the residents could use whenever they wanted or needed. He indicated to provide some facts from the City side, this has been a use that has been going on for decades however, it is a roadway right-of-way and is not a road. It is not a built road; it is a private access currently on a public right-of-way. It does not meet City standards. If anybody were to build an access to their property that they were going to use on a regular basis where it results in rutting, as this clearly does, and needs some sort of maintenance, then that has to be paved. That is clearly in the City's Zoning Standards and Requirements. The City has made property owners pay portions of rear access to their properties because they were using it too often. That gets into erosion and general maintenance and environmental concerns as well. Mr. Culver explained he was not even aware that this use was going on. Certainly, members of his staff knew, and he did not know who put that dead end sign up or when it went up. The City, as a whole, knew that this access was being used in that way for a long time. He did not know it was being used like that until there was talk about the pathway. If the City is going to allow that continued use then really the access needs to be upgraded to meet City standards. He indicated all of the neighbors get along fine right now but there is also some concerns because there is no actual legal access through the adjacent properties forthese people to gain access Page 7 of 9