Minutes - Parks and Recreation Commission - 04/11/2002 - Not Signed

Home

Motion carried. Voting Yes: Vice Chair Johns, Commissioners LaMere, Olds, Rolfe, and Shryock. Voting No: None. Absent: Chairperson Cook, Commissioner Ostrum. Case #2: Provide General Park Dedication Recommendations for Park Dedication for Sunflower Ridge Townhomes Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos explained the purpose of this case is to confirm the Commission’s earlier direction and to approve both the T.H. #47 trail route, and the developer’s proposal for private recreational space. He said the Staff Review letter from late March suggested the bituminous path along Alpine Drive be extended along the limits of this plat. John Peterson, applicant, stated he hadn’t seen the Staff Recommendations. He explained this approximately 20-acre site is proposed to have 127 townhomes. There were 131 in the first submission, which is slightly over the maximum. The greenspace calculation was made based on 131 units. After deducting asphalt for driveways and streets, there was 52 percent of greenspace, which is 12 percent over the City’s recommendation. That number will increase now that 3 buildings are eliminated. He stated Staff recommended the responsibility lie with the developer to install sidewalk on one side of the curvy road that runs north and south. He said the approximately 600 feet on Alpine Drive is recommended for an 8-foot bituminous path, while along the east boundary is the private path. He indicated the trail system shown on the map is in the rear yards. It is basically through common space, which would be owned by all residents. He noted that all of the common space is public space, in that is open to all residents of the subdivision. He also identified another acre that could be designated as public space for the residents. He said these public spaces wouldn’t have a lot of amenities. He explained the demographics show the residents will likely be singles, some with and some without children, and empty nesters. Most the children in this development would likely be grandchildren. For this reason, he explained, they prefer to offer passive recreation rather than swingsets and toys. It would be expected that the grandparents would take their grandchildren to another park in the area. Also, this type of Homeowners’ Association typically has a more difficult time obtaining insurance for these types of parks. Mr. Peterson listed the park costs involved with $1,700 per unit in Park Dedication and $400 for Trail Fee, which is $266,000 so far. He noted the trail along Alpine Drive will add to that cost. He said in his experience, this is the highest of any city he’s worked in. He also mentioned the pedestrian traffic in this development would have 2 parallel corridors to move north and south. One would be the concrete sidewalk in the front yards, and the second would be the trail in the back yards. He said if this were an existing development, and the trail was proposed to be added, most residents would object. He suggested one pedestrian corridor is appropriate. He said he would choose to put it in the front yard, where it is, and would rather not put the trails in the back yards. Commissioner Olds stated the trail offers amenities to the residents for that development and also to the residents of Ramsey. He said he understood there would be resistance to putting in a trail in an existing development. However, he noted, in a new development, people are aware of the Park and Recreation Commission/April 11, 2002 Page 5 of 14