Minutes - Council - 07/26/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Case #11: Request for Final Plat Approval of Chestnut Hill 5th Addition; Case of Good Value Homes, Inc., John Peterson Zoning Administrator Frolik stated that John Peterson of Good Value Homes, Inc., is requesting final plat approval of Chestnut Hill 5th Addition, the final phase of Chestnut Hill. This plat is based on a revised preliminary plat just approved in the previous case. The plat consists of t7 lots, all of which meet the minimum area and dimension requirements. She stated that the Park and Recreation Commission recommended acquiring Et trail link between Ht, nter's Hill. City Administrator Schroeder suggested that the Park and Recreation Commission is on the right track attempting to connect neighborhoods and neighborhood parks. The trail shown, adjacent to Lot 4, is a problem relative to the development because of the drainage area; the trail dumps into highland, The issue in taking that portion of the trail and connecting it with a higher portion of property in a more used area is that people were concerned that it would be too close to their homes. The segment of the higher portion of the trail is an $18,000 cost increase. Mt'. Schroeder felt that it's a good idea to connect trails, etc., however, Council has to weigh if this would be developer or City funded and determine if this is worth the benefit. Thc Park Commission did not weigh out the economics of the issue. Mr. John Peterson stated that this is indeed a difficult situation. If the trail is built as proposed on his property, it leads to an isolated park. To eliminate one of three lots between the future Sunwood Drive and the wetland is very expensive. If the trail is run along the back of Lots 1,2, and 3, you cannot get to the parks from there because of the wetlands you would have to cross. Another option would be to not build a trail now but wait until at some point when Mr. Deemer's land is developed. Mr. Peterson stated that "in 1990, there were no provisions for access to the park. We proposed to change the plat because of wetlands. It was going to be a cul-de-sac but there were some legitimate complaints of too much traffic going back to Hunter's Hill. This would solve a serious traffic issue, but not a t,'ail issue". He stated he would grant an easement between the wetland and Lot #4 and if the Park Commission wanted to make the connection that would be okay. He stated "we are not in the mood to build a boardwalk for $18,000". He stated they have paid their park fees or given land and if such an improvement is constructed, they should be credited for' it. tte suggested that when Ben Deemer's land is developed, the City could require an easement for the park. Mr. Schroeder stated that he would like to take "one mom shot at working out the trail deal". He suggested that maybe the Department of Natm'al Resources has a less expensive way of dealing with this. If not, he felt it would not be economically feasible; not money well spent, lte inquired if Mr. Peterson would be agreeable to Council granting the final plat approval contingent upon working out the park dedication. Mr. Peterson stated he woulcl be in agreement and if DNR agrees to a trail between Lot 3 and the wetland, that would be agreed to also. Mayor Gilbertson inquired about park dedication to which Mr. Peterson stated that there is an overall park dedication agreement. Ms. Frolik stated that Good Value's dedication amounts to $3,400. Councilmember Peterson asked if Mr. Peterson is willing to consider the easement to which Mi'. Pcterson replied yes. Mayor Gilbenson suggested that was reasonable. City Council/July 26, 1994 Page 20 of 27