Laserfiche WebLink
Davidson stated that staff was directed to look into that issue <br />back in December 1991. <br /> <br />John Franklin, Director of Community Development, stated that they <br />had looked into the issue. Their research consisted of discussing <br />the notion of acquiring the tract or using it for pedestrian access <br />on two other vacant lots further south, where the easement was. <br />They re-examined the north portion of the subdivision to see if <br />there was a practical way to get an easement through the developed <br />properties and re-establish the alignment of the sidewalk along <br />McCaslin, as proposed where it would align with the Open Space <br />area. They took a visual check as well as research. The property <br />owners that were contacted indicated that they were not interested <br />in selling part of their lots to the City for a pedestrian access <br />way. The properties at the north end of the subdivision are <br />developed except for the last two lots. Right next door is what <br />will be a sidewalk on the west side of McCaslin Blvd., which runs <br />by the City's Open Space. They looked at the Ohmeda property. <br />They did not talk to Ohmeda about access. That would involve <br />another access point through the vacant l°ts through the Enclave to <br />the Ohmeda property (TAPE INAUDIBLE). We ruled that as more <br />difficult. (TAPE INAUDIBLE). <br /> <br />Davidson stated that they would put this on the Agenda for the next <br />Council meeting. <br /> <br />Howard stated that he and Councilman Mayer are going out to the <br />property this week to look around and get a lay of the land. <br /> <br />Hedding asked if the two people on either side of the easement had <br />signed the petition. <br /> <br />Sober: They have not. <br /> sign. <br /> <br />They didn't want to <br /> <br />Davidson called for anyone else in the audience who wished to speak <br />on any item not on the Agenda. <br /> <br />NONE <br /> <br />REGULAR BUSINESS <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. 37, SERIES 1992 - CONCERNING THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL <br />OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY FOR PURPOSES OF REFUNDING CURRENT <br />INDEBTEDNESS <br /> <br />Tom Briggs, Kemper & Co., stated that this is a transaction that <br />was an initiative of the Council in its review of the financial <br />policies and the outstanding financial arrangements of the City. <br />The Council determined that there was a risk to the City, because <br />of certain balloon payments, which are due from the City in the <br />structure of certain financing arrangements. There was an <br /> <br /> <br />