Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/01/2017

Home

Option 2 — Outlot C or Park C — Primarily Credit Eligible — May 11, 2017 Staff Recommendation provided the mini -park development "unique" (nature -based play) and ancillary to greenway trail (either contiguous, or effective and safe pedestrian crossing of adjoining street). No land credit for the mini - park area is calculated under this scenario, as the developer is requesting the mini -park and deviation from the Park Plan and Park Development Policy. The land dedication for the mini -park (approximately one acre) is thoroughly consistent with the requirements of Planned Unit Development (PUD), which is the land use mechanism under which Riverstone is to be developed. a. Max Credit - $275,300 (if other improvements are desired by the development e.g. monument/sign, these shall be at the developer's expense). The Development Agreement (DA) shall specify that the park shall be developed as a Stage I improvement and be substantially complete by August 1, 2018. Additionally, all improvements and specifications shall be pre -approved by the City, with the Developer bearing all costs of bidding, administration, permitting (if any) as well as construction administration. The park construction agreement (DA) will be a reimbursable project, with the developer paying all cash Park Dedication owed, with the City issuing associated payment for each improvement as they are completed and accepted — for a total not -to -exceed amount of $275,300, b. 0 & M impacts: Development Agreement specifies homeowner's association provides all mowing services, fertilization and fall or spring leaf pick-up. City forces provide all other maintenance. c. Lake Itasca Park (development initiated in 3-10 years) Parking lot (and potential one -leg of round -a -bout) ii. Canoe/Kayak kiosk iii. Pier with seating at lake (existing CIP project) Staff is requesting a recommendation from the Commission either this evening or on June 9, 2017. The Community Park should provide the neighborhood park functions as well as the community park functions. Staff is recommending Option 2. Mr. Riverblood reviewed the breakdown of the $275,300 not -to -exceed Park Dedication credit amount. The differences between the original proposal and Option 2 were reviewed. The lots would be 65 feet wide rather than 80 feet wide.