Laserfiche WebLink
Study Session Meeting <br />January 29, 2005 <br /> <br />pay; the residents believe the City should pay the cost because they own the street. <br />The City of University City believes both sides are correct and that the cost should be <br />split fifty-fifty; there are both public and private benefits. Then residents argue that they <br />pay taxes and should not have an additional charge. The answer is that the other <br />ninety-five per cent with paved streets paid for the paving. In most cases it is included <br />in the cost of a house. Someone paid for the street to be paved, not the City. <br /> <br />Ms. Brot said she does not know how a case can be made to get the residents to pay <br />because the street is used by many people. Mr. Ollendorff said the argument is that if <br />there is a value to the residents property, which it is then they should pay the cost. Past <br />City Councils followed the fifty-fifty policy, occasionally making exceptions because of <br />the special needs of certain groups in the community. <br /> <br />Ms. Welsch wants some alleys in Ward Two to be brought up to the same condition as <br />alleys in Ward One. She wants neighborhood associations advised that they have the <br />right of petition so they can consider this option. <br /> <br />Mr. Ollendorff said there are other related issues which need to be discussed, pointing <br />out that there is a list of unimproved streets, a list of unimproved alleys, a statement of <br />street or alley improvement procedures and policies before the Council today. Due to <br />time constraints, the discussion has not been completed. Mr. Ollendorff suggested that <br />Councilmembers read these documents. He noted the sample peitition included and <br />stated that it is sent to residents when they asked for improvement, along with a letter <br />explaining the process. Other related issues include: vacation of some unimproved <br />streets and alleys and advising citizens of this option, for example some dead end <br />alleys located near the City limits. If there is no public need, then citizens should be <br />advised of the vacation option. Mr. Ollendorff wants to discuss this issue further. Mr. <br />Sharpe asked who makes the decision to vacate if the citizens do not want vacation, <br />and Mr. Ollendorff said the Council must decide. Mr. Sharpe asked if all streets <br />designated as green on the map were ones Mr. Ollendorff wants the City to proceed <br />with, whether or not the citizens agree. Mr. Ollendorff repeated the City policy was to <br />not improve streets unless citizens petition, but he is suggesting that on four streets <br />shown as green on the map, the City needs to proceed with improvements without the <br />petition process. There should be public hearings to listen to public opinion, and then <br />the City needs to decide. <br /> <br />Ms. Brot asked if City money is short and if residents do not request improvements, <br />then why should the City proceed with improvements? She wanted to know if they are <br />needed that much? Mr. Ollendorff said it was the Council's decision and that his <br />reasons for suggesting improvement are: the streets are eyesores, they are detrimental <br />to the neighborhood, they are expensive to maintain, and there is enough public interest <br />that they should be paved. He is simply making recommendations. There are other <br />issues related to this, but the meeting is out of time. <br /> <br />Page 7 <br /> <br /> <br />