res_7074 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

3 If I could drop down for a moment to Belmont - and we intentionally left the trees off - Belmont has no drainage. We propose as part of this improvement, if it's done, that again the water be picked up because of the relatively flat grades of the road to keep it from laying on the side and weakening the subsurface of the roadway. Once again, there is an existing road there. It's our opinion the best approach would be to remove that and put in a normal, standard roadway. Pascal also was reviewed. It's a very narrow roadway of about 20 feet. We found it to be considerably lower than the driveway for some of this property, and we recommend that roadway be raised somewhat if it's improved. To get to an item I think several of you are concerned about, is the fact that these roadways are 28 or 29 feet wide now, both Eldridge and Belmont, and there are a large number of mature trees that exist on both sides of both roads. If we were to build a 32 foot standard face to face curb with the pavement in between, we're fearful that with the root damage that conceivably we would end up destroying many of the trees on both sides, and that goes for both roads. We then looked at - we could offset the road, move it up north or south by three or four feet. That would save all the trees on one side, but I'm not a brave enough man to stand up here and tell you I want all the trees on the north side taken off so I can save the south, or all taken off on the south so I can save the north. I'm sure many of you really do like your trees, particularly the ones in the front of your house. We then looked at another alternative, which I guess is the one I would recommend. Namely, that if you have observed your neighbors on Burke, not taking into account the speed bumps in the roadway, you notice there is no parking for quite a distance on one side of Burke. That was done at their request. I guess our recommendation would be that both Eldridge and Belmont be built to only 29 feet of width and that parking only be allowed on one side or the other of the street. We're very open to which side that would be. For lack of anything better, I guess now I would say no parking on the north side. That would save, we feel, almost every tree along those two streets. I think there are only one or two trees that our preliminary work indicates would be affected. On Pascal again, you notice there are only about 20 feet of pavement existing because there's only a half right-of-way there. Again, when Har Mar went in, the westerly half was vacated and there's a series of trees that they have, or someone had put in just on their side of the right-of-way line, so we only have half a right-of-way to work with. There, because it's a short piece and because these homes involved have parking available and (inaudible) availabe, we would recommend this be built to 24 feet width and that no parking be allowed on the street. We feel this is one of the rare cases where no parking could be