Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Comment Buffer Zone topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident objects to $623,000 ‘buffer zone’ near railroad; council hears concerns

3068789 · January 27, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A Lennox resident raised concerns during public comment about a proposed two-block 'buffer zone' project near a railroad track estimated at $623,000, citing snow removal, traffic turning, and unclear benefit to adjoining property owners.

A Lennox resident told the city council during the visitors-to-be-heard period that he opposes a proposed two-block buffer project along a short stretch of Court Avenue adjacent to railroad tracks and questioned the project's $623,000 estimated cost.

Landry Robbins, who identified himself as the owner of property at 216 North Cedar, said he recently learned about the proposed buffer and read about it in a local paper. "$623,000 for a buffer zone that goes two blocks to nowhere, right alongside a railroad track," Robbins said, adding he did not request the buffer and that adjoining property owners had not told him they wanted it. He said he has maintained the adjacent area for years and is concerned that the new work would reduce snow storage and cause people to turn around on his property.

Robbins asked why the city would spend the stated amount on what he described as a sidewalk "going nowhere" and voiced concern about loss of a gravel turnaround at the end of Cedar that currently helps motorists. He also asked about whether the court property was dedicated for a road and whether it could be vacated to adjoining landowners.

City staff replied that drainage in the area is a primary concern identified by the city engineer and that the city is exploring grant funding for expensive projects. Staff said the Safe Routes to School program might or might not apply and noted that some recent street projects had not included all drainage work. Staff committed to share the project drawings; one councilor noted the drawings had been in the packet from a prior meeting and staff said they would provide the material online.

Robbins asked that the issue be returned to the council with answers; staff and at least one councilor said they appreciated his input and would follow up with drawings and additional detail at a future meeting.