Laserfiche WebLink
Public Works Committee 5. 1. <br />Meeting Date: 02/21/2012 <br />By: Tim Himmer, Engineering/Public <br />Works <br />Title: <br />Discuss Trail Easement at 15620 Krypton Street NW <br />Background: <br />City staff was contacted recently by an individual that is considering purchasing the property at 15620 Krypton <br />Street NW. The main topic of conversation was related to the existing bituminous trail that extends down the east <br />property line and into the backyard. He was inquiring whether there was a purpose for this trail, and when it might <br />be utilized in the future. Reviewing property files it was discovered that this trail was intended for a dual purpose; <br />a maintenance access to the City's sanitary sewer system, and a pedestrian connection. <br />When WILDLIFE SANCTUARY 3RD was subdivided in 2003 the trail construction was an obligation of the <br />development agreement (see attached development agreement excerpt), and was to be located along the common <br />lot line between lots 5 and 6, Block 3. Extension of a gravity sanitary sewer was also a requirement of the project, <br />such that an existing lift station could be eliminated when a future trunk extension was complete through a <br />neighboring development to the north and west. During construction the sanitary sewer had to be realigned slightly <br />due to environmental constraints, and additional sanitary sewer easements were granted for this new alignment at <br />the time. <br />It appears the trail was constructed over the top of the sanitary sewer trunk line that will be used in the future, and <br />not along the entire extents of the common lot line, as referenced. The separate recordable trail easement <br />referenced in the development agreement does not appear to exist, therefore we currently only have rights to access <br />the current easement area for drainage and utility purposes. <br />Notification: <br />Observations: <br />The potential property purchaser has submitted an offer to the current property owner and is awaiting financing <br />approval before finalizing the purchase agreement. He is concerned about potentially having a trail through the <br />center of his backyard forever and is requesting that the City relocate the trail into the easement along the common <br />lot line, as it was originally intended. He understands the dual purpose of the trail and is accepting of its intended <br />use, for utility maintenance and pedestrians, but would like to see it placed on the lot line. He has even gone so far <br />as to state that he would be willing to work with City staff to secure the pedestrian trail easement along the common <br />lot line (see attached e-mail). If he is unsuccessful is getting this trail relocated he is considering withdrawing his <br />offer to purchase the property. <br />The potential property purchaser has offered up a solution to resolve this matter; which includes the City removing <br />the portion of the trail that is not contained within the 15' easement along the common lot line, and the property <br />owner restoring the area (sod of seed) and securing the required pedestrian trail easement. This seems like a <br />reasonable request to resolve this matter in the short term, but since the City has dedicated drainage and utility <br />easement throughout most of the backyard there is no guarantee that we would not come back in the future and <br />utilize this space for maintenance purposes. <br />A paved access is preferred for utility maintenance in these situations because we often receive complaints <br />from residents after we access their property with heavy equipment and rut up/damage their lawns and/or irrigation <br />systems. Currently there is no need to access the sanitary sewer in this location, because it will not be utilized until <br />the adjacent area develops, or the City decides it wants to construct this gravity system. It will most likely remain <br />in place until such time that development of the adjacent land occurs and the final trunk alignment is reviewed with <br />