Laserfiche WebLink
FEB 9 1994 66 FAcEU <br />Discussion continued about what would have to be done <br />to bring the road up to the standard where it could be <br />considered for petition paving, and Mr. Davis explained that <br />it would be necessary to remove all the materials there and <br />put in the proper subgrade and a base. You wouldn't be <br />starting with the typical county road we have now. He <br />continued to stress that his concern is that he does not <br />feel the county has resources to take on private road <br />reconstruction. It would be a tremendous burden on the Road <br />and Bridge Department to begin that precedent and as a <br />result the existing petition paving program would suffer. <br />Commissioner Bird agreed and stated that he would have <br />a hard time justifying that the --general public will benefit <br />from the county participating in paving and accepting <br />maintenance of this road. <br />Commissioner Wodtke felt we do have to put the burden <br />on the property owners to build the road to meet our <br />standards and did not believe we want to encourage <br />maintaining these roads perpetually. He asked about the <br />possibility of letting the bid for this through our county <br />contract. <br />Administrator Wright felt that if the road is brought <br />up to county standards, we should accept it, but he would <br />hesitate on our bidding it. <br />Chairman Scurlock also expressed concern about the <br />County supervising this road improvement as he wondered what <br />responsibility it might place of us. <br />Commissioner Bird was perplexed by. the Administrator's <br />statement that if the road is brought up to county stand- <br />ards, we should take it over for maintenance, which he <br />believed is 1800 from what the Public Works Director said. <br />He stressed that he is all for bringing the road up to <br />standard but did not believe he wanted to accept it for <br />maintenance. <br />51 <br />