Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 6, 2000 <br />Mayor Bergeson suggested the trail be put in when the streets are put in. Staff advised <br />the City has been doing that recently so prospective buyers know where trails will be <br />placed. <br />Council directed staff to move forward with the construction of 62nd Street with <br />barricades and a temporary turn around to the north. <br />The City Engineer introduced Mr. Jason Wedel of TKDA. Mr. Wedel will be filling in <br />for the City Engineer next week. <br />LACASSE DRIVE TRAIL ISSUE, RICK DEGARDNER <br />Staff distributed a memo regarding LaCasse Drive trail. The memo outlined the <br />background of the trail placement and the primary objective of the trail. The developer <br />has indicated that should the City decide to vacate the trail, he will ,w.n the City $1,000 <br />since he will not have to pay for the installation of the trail. <br />Staff recommended the developer construct the trail. Ho <br />decide to vacate this trail, perhaps the City may want <br />block lengths in the future to avoid this problem. S aff <br />previously suggested that the.trail be kept in a gr <br />Staff advised the trail should be paved or vac <br />Mr. Petronack, 6601 LaCasse Drive, s <br />the trail, the residents will take care <br />. in even though it was not shown <br />of the trail noting it is not part <br />the streets were put in. The ,� =" gs,• <br />signatures from the neigh ca <br />R �'ca <br />the Council <br />allowing excessive <br />ouncil Member Carlson <br />d be mowed by the City. <br />City chooses not to vacate or pave <br />ed he understands why the trail was put <br />stributed a map indicating the placement <br />ail segment. The trail was not put in when <br />are also opposed to the trail. He noted he can get . <br />g their opposition to the trail. <br />Council Member Dalt,. ' . f _' staff's reason for keeping the trail. Staff advised <br />keeping the trail is strict; fr om a planning level regarding street layout. An agreement <br />was made with the deve1 • er for the excessive block length. From a park perspective, the , <br />trail is not needed. <br />Council Member O'Donnell asked if this situation has occurred anywhere else in the City. <br />The City Planner advised he does not know of anywhere else this has occurred in the <br />City. He stated that if the trail had not been put in, a road would have been put in. He <br />noted there are a number of places within the City that blocks are too long. <br />The City Engineer noted there was a roadway and a watermain loop on that property. <br />Council Member Reinert asked if the staff recommendation is based on the ordinance. <br />Staff advised the recommendation is strictly based on the ordinance. <br />5 <br />