My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7.4. SR 12-19-2016
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2016
>
12-19-2016
>
7.4. SR 12-19-2016
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2017 12:44:38 PM
Creation date
12/16/2016 11:34:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
12/19/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Parks and Recreation Commission - December 14, 2016 <br /> The Parks and Recreation Commission re-reviewed the application. They discussed the <br /> "intent" of the Trail Connectivity map located within the Parks Master Plan. Master plans <br /> developed by the city are intended to evaluate a comprehensive system and establish plans to <br /> guide city decisions, thus taking out the guess work for individual properties and analyzing <br /> them case by case. These types of plans typically include graphics which are utilized <br /> extensively to make decisions. Staff's interpretation of the Parks Master Plan,based on text <br /> and the map graphics,is the trail along Elk Lake Road is located on the west side and that an <br /> easement should not be required on the subject property. Without direction, Commission <br /> Chair, Dave Anderson, contacted Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. (HKGi),who drafted the <br /> Master Plan, and requested clarification on the intention of the Master Plan graphics. <br /> Attached is a memo from Paul Paige of HKGi with his interpretation of the Master Plan <br /> Exhibit 5.6. However, decisions cannot be made based on intent but rather all decisions <br /> must be made based on plans approved by the City Council. <br /> The applicants spoke during the public hearing and questioned how the city can require an <br /> easement on the east side of Elk Lake Road when the Master Plan shows a future trail on the <br /> west side of Elk Lake Road as it relates to their property. They stated that if the intent was <br /> to leave opportunities for interpretation of a future trail location, the map is unclear and <br /> misleading to the public. They also questioned how the city can require a cash dedication for <br /> park dedication, as well as an easement for public use. They understand they own the land <br /> under the easement but when a trail is constructed on their property for the public,it <br /> becomes "public land" and not just their land. They feel it is two forms of dedication. <br /> The Commission recommended (4-3) that a 10 foot trail easement be required along the <br /> western side of Lot 2,Block 1, of the proposed plat (east side of Elk Lake Road). <br /> Staff continues to recommend park dedication be paid in the form of cash for one lot and <br /> no easement be required. <br /> N:APublic Bodies\Agenda Packets\12-19-2016\Final\7.4 ot8 P&R Memo.docx <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.