Laserfiche WebLink
- M <br />DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS <br />On September 25, 1990 the Board of County Commissioners -adopted <br />five Resolutions, Nos. 90-148, 90-149, 90-150, 90-151, and <br />90-152, providing for certain paving and drainage improvements <br />to: <br />1) <br />42nd Avenue <br />from <br />6th Street to <br />8th Street - <br />* 67% in <br />favor <br />2) <br />42nd Avenue <br />from <br />10th Street to <br />12th Street <br />-* 61% in <br />favor <br />3) <br />'44th Avenue <br />from <br />16th Street to <br />Pinewood Subdivision <br />- * 73% <br />in favor <br />4) <br />13th Avenue <br />from <br />12th Street to <br />14th Street <br />- * 73% in favor <br />5) <br />2nd Street <br />from 23rd Avenue to 24th Avenue - <br />* 75% in <br />favor <br />* Percentage based on when petition was received by the <br />Engineering Division <br />On September 25, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners adopted <br />another Resolution No. 90-153 setting the date and time for a <br />Public Hearing to discuss the advisability, cost and amount of <br />the assessment against each property owner.. This hearing is <br />scheduled for October 23, 1990. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve <br />assessment rolls, and -confirming resolutions with changes, if <br />any, made after input at the Public. Hearing. Revised confirming <br />resolutions and assessment rolls will be forwarded to Chairman <br />of the Board for signature. <br />44th Avenue from 16th Street to Pinewood Subdivision <br />Public Works Director Jim Davis reported that after the <br />Public Hearing of October 23, 1990 was postponed for two weeks <br />until today, staff met last week with some of the residents on <br />44th Avenue to discuss the design of the roadway. <br />Chairman Eggert opened the Public Hearing, and asked if <br />anyone wished to be heard in this matter. <br />William F. Patterson of 44th Avenue advised that during the <br />discussion on paving, the property owners did have a request -to <br />reduce the width of the pavement from 20 feet to 18 or 16 feet; <br />which would alleviate the expense to some of the people. <br />Director Davis advised that 18 feet would be the minimal <br />acceptable width for that particular roadway. If the Board <br />approves it, we would be going from 20 feet to 18 feet. He felt <br />there is some flexibility in that it is a dead-end street, but he <br />did not want to set a precedent. <br />� <br />� 35 X00 F�iur. C <br />