Laserfiche WebLink
for staff discussion with applicant for park and trail purposes and to credit future development on <br />the parcel for this dedication. <br /> <br />Civil Engineer II Linton indicated Mr. Schaeffer was proposing to subdivide approximately 20 <br />acres of land in the northeast comer of the City. Trottbrook ran through the middle of the site <br />and the division between the proposed properties would be in the middle of the creek. The <br />Planning Commission required urban density standards be followed so placement of the house <br />did not conflict with the ultimate development possibilities. <br /> <br />Civil Engineer II Linton noted the applicant preferred to pay the $2,200 single lot park dedication <br />at this time and staff recommended the current cash offer be accepted; however, staff <br />recommended the Development Agreement include a condition that any future subdivision would <br />require that a minimum of 10% of the land be used for parks. <br /> <br />Civil Engineer II Linton stated the two green parcels on the map were part of the current park <br />system and indicated where it would be advantageous to make a connection. <br /> <br />Discussion followed regarding the potential park dedication through the property. City Engineer <br />II Linton noted there were approximately 2,3 acres connecting the east and west parcels; <br />however, he believed 2.3 acres was above the maximum land the City could require for park <br />dedication. <br /> <br />Chairperson Johns indicated she would rather have the land. <br /> <br />Civil Engineer II Linton stated he had discussed with the applicant that the City's precedence had <br />been to reserve for future needs if and when land development took place. <br /> <br />Chairperson Johns added she would like to see the connection made, especially because the <br />property was surrounded by park connections. <br /> <br />Principal City Engineer Olson suggested the Commission make a motion to table this item until <br />Mr. Schaeffer was available, as it was important he was present to discuss his reasons for not <br />wishing to .give the land. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Olds, seconded by Commissioner Shryock, to table this item until the <br />May Park and Recreation Commission meeting. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Johns, Commissioners Olds, Shryock, LaMere, <br />Lehman, and Pontius. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioner Ostrum. <br /> <br />Case #6: Outdoor Meeting Schedule: <br /> <br />Civil Engineer II Linton explained that the Park Commission had previously held the May <br />through October meetings in a park. The second Thursdays through October were as follows: <br />May 13, June 10, July 8, August 12, September 9, and October 14. <br /> <br />Park and Recreation Commission/April 8, 2004 <br /> Page 13 of 21 <br /> <br /> <br />