Integrated Transportation Plan Minutes 2010 03-09-10
United City of Yorkville
800 Game Farm Road
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Telephone: 630-553-4350
Fax: 630-553-7575
Meeting Summary
INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION TASK FORCE
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
5:00 – 6:00 PM
City Hall Council Chambers
800 Game Farm Road
Attendees: Gary Golinski, Wally Werderich, Phil Stuephert, Deb Horaz, Bart Olson, Laura Schraw
Southwest Interceptor map was presented and discussed for a possible trail location. Laura commented
that we still would have to obtain an easement from the railroad, if the interceptor is in the railroad
ROW. The terrain and stream crossing were also brought up, there still is quite a lot of work even if we
try to use part of the SW Interceptor easement for our trail.
The Hoover/River’s Edge trail connection was discussed and Staff will come back when numbers are
received from the County for the trail connection.
Railroad ROW applications were presented (one for the road easement and one for the trail crossing)
which are two separate applications. It was determined that for the trail, the application should cover
the entire distance when we apply for the railroad easement. Members would like to see where the trail
would be located (north or south side) and the connection to Forest Preserves and other public
properties and neighboring towns. For the trail crossing at Riverfront Park, that can wait until we are
ready to push the ComED trail project forward. At this time, Staff is to proceed with the application for
the Hydraulic Street easement to extend the access road for the Riverfront Park parking lot.
A letter from the County regarding the Route 47 widening on the south side of town was presented to
members.
The trail bank resolution was presented and discussed. Members generally were happy with the idea of
allowing the resident to put the money into a bank to fund trail projects in locations where work was
progressing. The money would come from homes or businesses that are required to put in sidewalk in
front of their homes (per ordinance). The trail bank would allow them to put the money into a city
account for the city to spend on a project in a different location, later knowing that when the project
(trail extension) occurs in front of their house, the city will be responsible for the cost at that time. The
hope is to provide more connected pieces of trail at one time, instead of providing trail in segments that
can be degraded and will be the city’s responsibility to maintain.
Mr. Werderich commented that he sees this with developments, such as Raging Waves and Autumn
Creek, and wondered about using this in those areas. Later discussion determined that the
complications with this situation is that the developer is paying for and maintaining these portions of
trail, and the city would have difficulty collecting the funds from the developer and using them to the
same effect with the prevailing wage laws.
The committee was interested in knowing the cost of the 10’ asphalt trail versus the 5’ concrete
sidewalk, and what we can ask a resident to contribute. Specifically, if we asked someone to contribute
the cost of the 5’ sidewalk, and instead put a trail in front of their house, do we instead need to ask
them for the cost of the 10’ asphalt trail because it is cheaper? What about not requiring the trail until
the businesses on other sides start up?
The resident can put in their sidewalk and would not have to follow the trail bank, but the city does
have the right to tear it up later and install trail if it is in our trail plan.
Additional clarification was requested on if the city can get the 3 bids for the current estimate? Or
would this be submitted by the owner? The committee would prefer that the city determines the price,
and establish a formula based on current costs.
Staff will follow up with Joe on clarification about the trail bank.
5:00 PM Tuesday May 18, 2010
Next Meeting Date: