Laserfiche WebLink
Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos indicated some Park Dedication will be required and some <br />easement will be necessary from a neighboring park. He added that the adjacent plats are close in <br />timing for development, and interrelated. He said there is some momentum to have the <br />developers collaborate on all issues. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rolfe pointed out this subdivision is 60 acres, and the subdivisions around it are 40 <br />to 60 acres, and it is approaching 160 acres being developed as suburban. He questioned if a <br />small neighborhood park should be considered. <br /> <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos responded the Park and Trail plan does need to be examined. <br />When it was last visited, single family homes were being built. He pointed out one opportunity <br />for a neighborhood park, which is west of Sunflower Ridge. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rolfe noted there will be 300 acres built out when this whole area is developed. <br />He said the Scout Camp is across the road, and there are no plans to develop that. However, he <br />said, typically Scout Camps feel the pressures of suburban development and “leap frog” out. He <br />concluded this is open space now, and may not be available to the public. <br /> <br />Mr. Peterson stated he has submitted the application for the preliminary plat, and requested the <br />Commission provide a decision on the preliminary plat. <br /> <br />Motion by Commission Rolfe, seconded by Commission Shryock to approve the Preliminary Plat, <br />with the Park Dedication and Trail Fees satisfied with cash consistent with policy, with the trail <br />connection along T.H. #47 ineligible for Trail Fee credit. <br /> <br />General consensus was this case would not need to be resubmitted to the Park and Recreation <br />Commission if there are no substantial changes. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Vice Chair Johns, Commissioners LaMere, Olds, Rolfe, and <br />Shryock. Voting No: None. Absent: Chairperson Cook, Commissioner Ostrum. <br /> <br />Case #4: Provide General Park Dedication Recommendation for Wildlife Sanctuary <br />rd <br />3 Addition <br /> <br />rd <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos described the location of the Wildlife Sanctuary 3 Addition. He <br />pointed out the trail alignment as recommended by the Staff. He noted a piece of land of the <br />nd <br />Wildlife Sanctuary 2 Addition is platted as an outlot. It is between the developments, and north <br />rd <br />of the lot line for the 3 Addition. <br /> <br />Vice Chair Johns asked if this piece would be a transportational piece. <br /> <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos replied stated that as it related to past practice, yes. He said he <br />would prefer the trail connection be bituminous, which would help identify it as a trail. He added <br />he would recommend the section along the cul-de-sac and southeast would not be credit eligible. <br />He clarified the portions of the trail that would qualify as ‘transportational’ in nature, and <br />therefor, not eligible for credit. <br />Park and Recreation Commission/April 11, 2002 <br />Page 8 of 14 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />