Laserfiche WebLink
City of Centerville <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />May 11, 2005 <br />Council Member Lee asked if Park and Recreation has seen the plans. <br />Ms. Stephan indicated that Park and Recreation discussed it at the last meeting. <br />Mr. LeBlanc indicated it was discussed and they would like to see trails along LaMotte <br />Drive and some way to get from Meadow Lane to LaMotte Park. <br />Mr. Wilharber suggested that Park and Recreation come to the Church and ask for what <br />they want and then the Church will discuss it and respond. <br />City Administrator Larson was asked to send a letter to the Church outlining the request. <br />Ms. Stephan indicated that Park and Recreation made a motion on this but she does not <br />have that information. <br />Motion by Council Member Lakso, seconded by Council Member Lee, to table for <br />further information on the trails. <br />Mr. Wilharber explained that there is no requirement for park dedication fees from the <br />Church so the easement is of the Church’s own free will. He then said that he has stated <br />that he does not think that the easement would be an issue for the Church and asked that <br />Council not hold up approval of the site plan for another two weeks. <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated that there is no ordinance requirement for the easements <br />and suggested that Council consider approval of the plan and direction to Staff to work <br />out the easements with the Church. <br />Council Member Lee indicated that when the City vacated Goiffon Road there were <br />discussions that the City would get an easement for trail around the lake and he would <br />like something defined before approval. <br />Mayor Capra clarified that the easement was not around the lake it was on the Church <br />property but not around the lake it was east of the Church building. <br />Council Member Lee commented that Park and Recreation thought it was around the <br />lake. <br />Mr. Wilharber indicated that the Church had no issue with it on the east side of the <br />property but did not want an easement through where Goiffon was vacated due to liability <br />and if the ground would ever be sold. <br />VOTE: Ayes – 4, Nays – 1(Capra). Motion carried. <br />2. Ordinance #80, Amendment to Swimming Pool Fence Height <br />Page 3 of 8 <br /> <br />