Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Intergovernmental Agreement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CUSD 300 committee delays Recreation Drive IGA vote, seeks written guardrail and berm commitments
Summary
Committee members discussed an intergovernmental agreement for Recreation Drive (road between Dundee Middle School and the park district). Members asked for specific guardrail, berm and speed‑table commitments to be added to the IGA and agreed to move the vote to the April 22 board meeting.
The Board Operations Committee on April 8 discussed an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) governing construction of Recreation Drive — a road between Dundee Middle School and the Dundee Township Park District — and requested specific, written commitments for guardrail placement and a natural berm before approving the agreement.
A facilities staff member summarized the plan: the roadway will include curbs and a sidewalk on the district side to provide a walking connection from the school to the park district property, and the township will provide guardrail at the apex near the track and a speed table near the same location. The staff member said the speed table is wider than a standard speed bump — about 8 feet wide — and that the township also plans a 2‑ to 3‑foot natural berm on district property to support guardrail installation.
Board members pressed for those commitments to be explicitly included in the IGA. One board member said, "I'd like it specifically stated, I think, would make me more comfortable with that," and another asked whether the addendum could be available by email before voting.
Cost and scope details were discussed: a district estimate for a fence along the property line was cited as about $28,000 (roughly 300 linear feet at about $95 per linear foot), and guardrail runs were described as either a single continuous 40‑foot section or two 20‑foot sections. The staff member said the township will put agreed‑upon elements in writing and that the IGAs are prepared by lawyers for both parties.
Committee members agreed to delay the committee's vote on the IGA and moved the item to the April 22 board meeting to allow the written commitments to be incorporated and circulated. A board member said the preference was to "get it all in writing now" and the group concurred that final language should be included before formal approval.
No formal IGA vote occurred at the April 8 committee meeting; members requested the updated IGA language and legal review prior to the next vote.
