Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roads topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council directs staff to draft 66-ft right-of-way, curb-and-gutter proposal including 36-ft pavement option
Summary
Public Works proposed narrower 66-foot right-of-way and curb-and-gutter sections for new bench-area development; council voted to direct staff to develop formal options including a 36-foot pavement, 5-foot sidewalks and maps identifying where 99-foot sections should remain.
The Wellsville City Council voted May 6 to ask Public Works to prepare formal road-standard options after a presentation from Chris Breinholt that proposed narrower right-of-way widths and curb-and-gutter street sections for new development.
Chris Breinholt described a package of suggested changes intended to address stormwater and maintenance concerns in bench and outlying areas: "The curb and gutter would be associated with storm drain piping underneath it" and the proposed new asphalt width for bench sections would be "36 feet wide" where the existing local standard is 24 feet. He said switching from 99-foot to 66-foot rights-of-way in new development could reduce city liability and water use in park strips but would increase the need for storm piping and engineering in some areas.
Council members discussed enforcement and maintenance of swales in existing neighborhoods; Breinholt said swales are frequently filled or undersized and that catch basins and proper sizing are important to prevent overflow. He also provided a rough land-cost/cost-of-infrastructure estimate, saying for a typical 100-foot lot the extra construction cost is about $8,000 and estimated land value around $18,000, yielding a net benefit to landowners when right-of-way requirements shrink.
A motion by a council member instructed Breinholt to draft two proposal scenarios — including a curb-and-gutter, 36-foot asphalt option with 5-foot sidewalks — and to return with maps identifying where the existing 99-foot right-of-way should remain. The motion was seconded and approved by voice vote.
No ordinance or formal standard change was adopted at the meeting; the direction is for staff to prepare formal proposals and cost scenarios for future council consideration.
