Laserfiche WebLink
The following fgur stncts not in the request deserve notation: <br /> <br />1) Ford Br~!~oki ~)istrict received 204 points. The district does have a recently procured tiny lot <br /> suitable ~or!~ot lot development, but any expenditures in this area would benefit far fewer <br /> f. Ir r 1 <br /> olks th~n 9~93 dollar per capita ratio average. The critical issue he e is the smal amount <br /> of horn? iH the district. Ford Brook itself exacerbates the situation by bisecting the <br /> district, iUaf~rmnately, the younger families to the east in Green Valley Estates do not have <br /> any p~ lan~l. However, there exists open space in close proximity to most homes in both <br /> of Ford~r00k District's subdivisions, Rodeo Hills and Green Valley Estates. <br /> When tl~e a~ricultural land north of Green Valley Estates is developed, it will most likely <br /> link the[ twc} subdivisions (future intersection of 179th Lane N.W. and Sodium Street <br /> N.W.) ~lvir~g the pedestrian park accessibility problem. <br />2&3) Both N~tur{ View and the Oak Districts have virtually no park property for a 1993 C.I.P. <br /> request.i: i <br /> <br />4) Greenland Hills District may receive passive recreational improvements as a result of any <br /> wetlanSmi~gation necessary for the extension of 153rd Avenue N.W. <br /> <br /> <br />