Memorandum for CouncilMayor Tammy de Weerd
City Council Members:
Keith Bird
Brad Hoaglun
Charles Rountree
David Zaremba
November 22, 2013
1VIEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Sonya Watters, Associate City Planner
CC: Bill Nary, City Clerk, Matt Schultz
RE: Reflection Ridge Subdivision No. 2 - MFP-13-002
On November 6, 2013, the City Council heard the applicant's request to modify the final plat for
Reflection Ridge Subdivision No. 2 to remove the stub street to the north across the Ridenbaugh
Canal. The Council recommended ACHD approve the applicant's request to remove the stub
street. ACHD had denied the applicant's request on October 23, 2013 and the applicant,f led a
request for reconsideration of the Commission's decision. At the recommendation of the City,
ACHD approved the applicant's request to modify the final plat on November 20, 2013.
At the hearing on November 6th, Council directed staff to check into several questions that came
up during the hearing, as follows:
® Can the City accept a trust for a pedestrian bridge? If so, arc there time limits
associated with a trust?
Yes, the City can accept a trust; there is not an established sunset clause on these types of
sureties. However, Staff is not reconunending a pedestrian bridge be required through
the subject final plat modification. Generally requirements such as this are made up front
at the time of annexation through a development agreement or as a preliminary plat
condition.
o Docs ACRD review engineering specifications for pedestrian bridges?
No, pedestrian pathways and associated bridges are part of the City's Master Pathways
flan and are not under the jurisdiction of ACHD.
• Will ACHD accept a trust for a pedestrian bridge?
No (see above)
• Will NMID allow a pedestrian bridge across the Ridenbaugh?
Most likely w/the following provisions: 1) a license agreement is required; 2) the bridge
needs to be fully caged/enclosed; 3) the bridge needs to be able to fully span the canal
without any supporting pillars in the canal; 4) for maintenance purposes, it would be nice
(but not required) if the bridge is located within the 50' wide area where the canal is
lined where water/sewer services cross.
Note: If a pedestrian crossing is required, the recreational easement. for the multi-use
pathtivay should be revised (approved by Council & recorded) to include the area to the
centerline ofthe canal.
Staff has prepared an Order of Approval for the final plat modification and it's
scheduled on the consent agenda for the hearing date of November 26th. If Council
wishes to have more discussion on this matter before approving the Order (or not
approving the Order), Council should make a motion to remove this item from the
consent agenda and place it on the regular agenda.