3410 La Sierra Ave. #F41 ~ Riverside, CA 92503 ~ (951) 286-4572
 
Community Forums    Search Site    Explore Our Community    The Board    Login/Signup    Contact Us

Adoption Of Straw Road By The County of Riverside

Residents Association of Greater Lake Mathews


Straw Road Meeting Notes From 9/15/2010
Read the full meeting notes here.
Read the County Agenda Here

Speakers:
Juan Perez - County of Riverside Transportation Department
Director of Transportation
951-955-6880
jcperez@rctlma.org

AND

Mike Franklin - County of Riverside
CSA Administration
951-955-6652
mfranklin@rivcoeda.org

8 straw road residents present
2 straw road residents missing

They stated that they will send out a survey to the residents of this area to get a feel for what the residents want. If you receive a survey and fill it out, PLEASE make sure you send a copy of it to info@raglm.org so we may keep a record of it.

They stated that there were two areas of this road that were dedicated to the county and not yet accepted. One of the areas however has not yet been dedicated as it does take approximately .07 of an acre of this resident’s property. They stated they would not compensate anyone for the dedication of their property.

They stated they will send a letter from the county to each of the residents that they will not just make the road go through in the future.

When asked why Straw road has not been maintained, they did not have an answer. Then they stated that they need to be notified if the road needs improvement.

There is currently approximately $340,000 in the CSA fund according to Mike Franklin.

We requested a legal description of a CSA, how it is created and dissolved. Mike did provide this for us:
Policy A21
Policy A48
What is a CSA

We were informed that utility poles would need to be moved for this paving of the road and it would come at the cost to the CSA not the utility company.

Some residents also expressed the concern that their water mains would be covered by the paving of this road. They were told that if they wanted them moved, it would be at their own expense. If there was a break in the water lines, it also would be at the expense of the residents to fix these line breaks.

Juan did propose to pave almost to the end of the road and to stop paving at the start of the last properties driveway. The county would then vacate the offers of dedication on the non-developed part of the road.

A ‘Not a Through Street’ sign was suggested by the residents to cut down on large truck traffic getting stuck at the end of the road which would then force them to turn around on private property. Juan said that such a suggestion could be proposed.

“Generally, the CSA wants to pave to another paved road.” “Your CSA Decisions are not Authority.” Mike Franklin

They stated that they were NOT going to notify all the paying members of this CSA128 for this paving.

Any reimbursement of fencing would come from the County.

If approved, it would be paved sometime next spring.

It is an option for the CSA to contract out the paving and not have it done by the County.

Mike stated that he found out about the requested CSA128 meeting 2 weeks ago.