My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-27-1988 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
04-27-1988 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/12/2013 12:51:20 PM
Creation date
6/12/2013 12:49:07 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />Planning Commission <br />April 14, 1988 <br />Trails <br />The City Planner pointed out that the City has a public easement for <br />trails, and therefore, liability as well as maintenance falls to the <br />City. However, the Planner suggested that an opinion could be obtained <br />from the City Attorney on this issue if the Commission would be more <br />comfortable. <br />Costa questioned the importance of a trail system within the City. <br />The Planner pointed out that trails will direct traffic into park areas <br />rather than having this traffic randomly cross private property to access <br />parks. <br />Davison pointed out the Roseville trails system and reported that this <br />system is heavily used. Roseville's trails are built in low areas that <br />would otherwise not have been usable property. <br />Costa felt that there was a loss of privacy when a trail was adjacent <br />to someone's home. <br />Herkenhoff noted that trails at the ends of cul -de -sac allow access to <br />park areas. <br />The City Planner reported that the proposed ordinance does not give the <br />City any additional power than it already has. The City cannot go in <br />and just take property from a property owner for a trail. The Planner <br />felt that trails were more applicable to newer areas of the City <br />that are being developed with park property adjacent. This proposed <br />ordinance will allow the City to have trails in all zoning districts <br />and eliminates the need for rezonings. This will save the City time <br />and money in not having to rezone trail property. <br />Costa reported that he has an easement behind his property and it has <br />caused vandalism problems for him. <br />Schweizer agreed that ideally a trail is better in a park situation. <br />The Planner pointed out that the parks themselves will still have <br />Public zoning, the proposed ordinances only allows trails within <br />the City's zoning districts so that trails do not have to be rezoned <br />Public, thus, saving the City money. <br />Perlinger recommended approval of proposed Ordinance No. 295 - AMENDING <br />SECTION SECTION 902 OF THE LITTLE CANADA CITY CODE KNOWN AS THE LITTLE <br />CANADA ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING DEFINITIONS FOR PUBLIC PARKS AND <br />PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN TRAILS. <br />Motion seconded by Schweizer. <br />Motion carried 4 - 2 (Costa and DeLonais opposing.) <br />Page 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.