My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.2. & 5.3. SR 01-25-1993
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1993
>
01-25-1993
>
5.2. & 5.3. SR 01-25-1993
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:36:06 AM
Creation date
5/24/2006 3:09:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
1/25/1993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
<br />~! . <br /> <br />~ C. CREDIT ON PARK FEES FOR LAND DEDICATED <br />Issue <br /> <br />Should the land dedicated for this trail system reduce the <br />amount of park dedication fees paid and if so, by what <br />amount? Staff recommends the acreage of the land <br />dedicated for the trail be multiplied by the raw land <br />value per acre and credited against the total park <br />dedication fees owed to the City. This assumes the trail <br />is located within the boundaries of this plat. <br /> <br />D. IMPROVEMENT OF TRAIL <br /> <br />Issue <br /> <br />Should this trail be upgraded now? If this trail is <br />upgraded now it will lead to private property; currently <br />there is no area wide park along the Mississippi River. <br />If it is left unimproved, future homeowners may have the <br />perception that the trail is infringing on them when it is <br />constructed. Staff feels the Park and Recreation <br />Commission should consider having the trail grading <br />accomplished with the rest of the plat grading, leaving <br />the bituminous surface until the park along the <br />~ Mississippi is established. <br /> <br />E. TYPE OF TRAIL <br /> <br />This trail is considered a primary loop. <br /> <br />Issue <br /> <br />Should this trail be for pedestrians and bicyclists, how <br />wide should it be or should there be 2 separate trails? <br /> <br />F. MAINTENANCE <br /> <br />Issue <br /> <br />Should the City maintain this trail? It is conceivable <br />that an association agreement could be required through <br />the platting process for the maintenance of this trail. <br />Staff feels that this is a City wide trail for public use <br />and that the City should maintain it. The issue of year <br />round maintenance should also be considered. <br /> <br />G. SUMMARY <br /> <br />".~ <br /> <br />Some of the issues raised in this memo go beyond what <br />recommendation on the plat should cover, however, <br />need to be considered to make sound decisions. There <br />also be other issues not mentioned in this memo. <br /> <br />your <br />they <br />may <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.