06/27/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Manager reminded Council if it wished to discuss any further evidence, it would require two-thirds vote of Council to do so. C.B. 1495--Levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer and storm sewer on Hawkins Lane from 18th Avenue to Highland Oaks Drive was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to segregate the Widmer portion of C.B. 1495, based on information supplied to Council which had not come up at the Panel hearing. Mr. Lieuallen said he would be interested in pursuing the matter, but wanted clarification to identify the issues which were essential to the Widmers, who had requested a reduction in assessments levied. He felt the discussion should be whether the Widmers should have to pay for repaving of a driveway that the City had removed for widening the street. Mr. Haws felt there was no new information to be con- sidered and the assessment should be levied as proposed. He said if the hearing were opened, then everyone who had been assessed should be allowed to present testimony, noting nothing had been brought out to suggest reconsideration. Mr. Obie said the portion he was most concerned with related to the driveway approach. A letter received from the Widmers indicated e the City has a policy which allows property owners to build their own approach. and Questioned whether the property owners were notified to allow them to do so. He asked staff if the City has such policy and were the property owners notified. Mr. Lieuallen said Bert Teitzel had explained at the Assessment Panel Hearing that a builder or contractor may build a temporary driveway approach, but if City removes at a future time, the City would pay for it, upon notification by the contractor. In this instance, the noti- fication was not received, the City took out Widmer.s driveway, and Widmer replaced it at his own expense. The contractor had not ful- filled his requirement. Mr. Lieuallen asked when the City deals with a contractor in such a situation, what the City.s obligation was to notify the persons who would have to pay the bills. Don Allen, Public Works, said the staff agreed with the letter from the Widmers that they should have had the choice to put in their driveway. He said the City.s policy was to make an attempt to secure written permission from a property owner before doing any work on a project. He said in this particular instance, City had written per- mission slips for the first year of the job, but not for the second year. He said also there was some question whether City staff had talked to the property owners to secure permission. He said there was no question the City had the right to do the work, but the policy does call for written permission. He could not answer whether verbal per- - mission had been given for this project. He said the City policies require a builder of new houses in a development to take out a sidewalk permit to establish the grade for the driveway. In this development, 6/27/77 -- 9 511