Laserfiche WebLink
Brand: <br /> <br />Davidson: <br /> <br />meeting this Wednesday, March 4, <br />1992. I would prefer Council finds <br />another date, so I wouldn't miss <br />that meeting. <br /> <br />There isn't a space available for <br />that entire week, except for that <br />Wednesday. <br /> <br />Couldn't we reverse our Work Session <br />and Council Meeting for these two <br />times? <br /> <br />Brand: No. <br /> <br />Hornbostel moved that Council reschedule the March 3, 1992 Council <br />meeting to March 4, 1992 and reschedule November 3,1992 Council <br />meeting to November 4, 1992. Seconded by Howard. All in favor. <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. 16, SERIES 1992 - REPLAT OF PORTION OF COAL CREEK <br />RANCH FILING NO. 1 <br /> <br />Steve Baysinger, Director of Parks & Recreation, stated that he is <br />one of the home owners noted in the Agenda item. He did not <br />initiate this and because of his position with the City, he has <br />abstained from taking an active roll in the action that Council is <br />being requested to take this evening. <br /> <br />Franklin provided background information for Council and the <br />audience. Coal Creek Ranch filing no. 1 was approved in 1988. The <br />two outlots in question, E & F, were deeded to the City for public <br />purpose and are comprised of less than an acre. The original <br />intent was for the outlot E was to handle an irrigation pond which <br />was to be excavated and installed as part of the golf course <br />irrigation system network. Outlot F's purpose was as a pathway <br />leading from the Development to the west to connect to a longer <br />Development and to provide a conduit for a proposed drainage and <br />utility access to what was to be new utilities in the Fairfield. <br />But, the irrigation pond was not required and the area was not <br />excavated. The area is in native vegetation. He found no specific <br />reference in the Annexation or Subdivision agreement concerning the <br />question of maintenance of private versus public. He understood <br />that the City's cost of maintenance of the current facility, which <br />would amount to one-half acre net, would be approximately $200.00 <br />per year to take care of the vegetation out there. That doesn't <br />include plowing snow or taking care of the sidewalk. The replat is <br />an attempt to change the boundaries of the two outlots to <br />incorporate portions of the two public outlots into the private <br />properties while preserving utility easements. Franklin stated <br />that the Planning Commission reviewed the request in a Public <br />Hearing and afforded a recommendation for denial. The Planning <br />Commission had two major concerns; one, that the City should not <br /> <br /> <br />