Discuss Trail Easement at 15620 Krypton Street NW

City staff was contacted recently by an individual that is considering purchasing the property at 15620 Krypton Street NW.  The main topic of conversation was related to the existing bituminous trail that extends down the east property line and into the backyard.  He was inquiring whether there was a purpose for this trail, and when it might be utilized in the future.  Reviewing property files it was discovered that this trail was intended for a dual purpose; a maintenance access to the City's sanitary sewer system, and a pedestrian connection.

When WILDLIFE SANCTUARY 3RD was subdivided in 2003 the trail construction was an obligation of the development agreement (see attached development agreement excerpt), and was to be located along the common lot line between lots 5 and 6, Block 3.  Extension of a gravity sanitary sewer was also a requirement of the project, such that an existing lift station could be eliminated when a future trunk extension was complete through a neighboring development to the north and west.  During construction the sanitary sewer had to be realigned slightly due to environmental constraints, and additional sanitary sewer easements were granted for this new alignment at the time.

It appears the trail was constructed over the top of the sanitary sewer trunk line that will be used in the future, and not along the entire extents of the common lot line, as referenced.  The separate recordable trail easement referenced in the development agreement does not appear to exist, therefore we currently only have rights to access the current easement area for drainage and utility purposes.

The potential property purchaser has submitted an offer to the current property owner and is awaiting financing approval before finalizing the purchase agreement.  He is concerned about potentially having a trail through the center of his backyard forever and is requesting that the City relocate the trail into the easement along the common lot line, as it was originally intended.  He understands the dual purpose of the trail and is accepting of its intended use, for utility maintenance and pedestrians, but would like to see it placed on the lot line.  He has even gone so far as to state that he would be willing to work with City staff to secure the pedestrian trail easement along the common lot line (see attached e-mail).  If he is unsuccessful is getting this trail relocated he is considering withdrawing his offer to purchase the property.

The potential property purchaser has offered up a solution to resolve this matter; which includes the City removing the portion of the trail that is not contained within the 15' easement along the common lot line, and the property owner restoring the area (sod of seed) and securing the required pedestrian trail easement.  This seems like a reasonable request to resolve this matter in the short term, but since the City has dedicated drainage and utility easement throughout most of the backyard there is no guarantee that we would not come back in the future and utilize this space for maintenance purposes.

A paved access is preferred for utility maintenance in these situations because we often receive complaints from residents after we access their property with heavy equipment and rut up/damage their lawns and/or irrigation systems.  Currently there is no need to access the sanitary sewer in this location, because it will not be utilized until the adjacent area develops, or the City decides it wants to construct this gravity system.  It will most likely remain in place until such time that development of the adjacent land occurs and the final trunk alignment is reviewed with a land use application.  Staff believes it would even be appropriate to require the adjacent future development be responsible for revisions to the sanitary sewer system that would support their project, and also to construct approximately 100' of trail along the common lot line as a pedestrian connection.

Staff is looking for direction on how the Council would like to resolve this matter, and offers a couple of thoughts for consideration:

• This pedestrian trail is shown on the City's Master Park and Trail Plan, so does the Council wish to keep this designation and secure the required pedestrian trail easement previously contemplated?
• Are you open to relocating the trail to the common lot line, now and in perpetuity?

Based upon discussion.  Depending on the outcome and timing, this may become a stand-alone case on the next available City Council meeting February 28th.