My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.5. SR 12-20-1999
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1999
>
12/20/1999
>
6.5. SR 12-20-1999
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:34:28 AM
Creation date
3/11/2005 4:01:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
12/20/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />PARK AND RECREATION MINUTES <br /> <br />5.A.2. Park Dedication Fees for Windsor Park <br /> <br />Steve Wensman reviewed the proposal by Dynamics, Lamm and Dehrer, LLP, for <br />Windsor Park, the City's first cluster development. Steve outlined three options for <br />park dedication. Option 1-accept 12.06 acres of wooded open space for park, <br />Option 2-require park dedication fees based on 21 lots as opposed to 31 , 21 <br />being the number that would be permitted under the conventional subdivision <br />regulations, and Option 3 would be to waive the park dedication fee completely. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kuester stated that the open space will be gone in the future as <br />properties continue to develop, while the proposed 12 acres is isolated at this <br />time, in the future it will more than likely be connected to other developments. <br />Phil stated that the park could be attractive to the public with the proper <br />amenities. Commissioner Reitsma suggested waiving the park fee, requiring the <br />sidewalk be extended on the roads all the way around the park, and requiring <br />the open space to have public access but have the homeowners provide <br />maintenance. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kuester observed that there is an inherent value conflict in the <br />preserved open space due to the lack of public access, but the public benefit <br />aesthetically for the open space. <br /> <br />The Commission felt that a bituminous sidewalk on the interior of the proposed <br />loop road would be better than the concrete sidewalk on the development side <br />of the street proposed by the developer. <br /> <br />Commissioner Reitsma stated he would be comfortable with the 12.06 acres as a <br />public park. <br /> <br />Commissioner Peterson argued that even if the City required public access, the <br />homeowners who would purchase the lots in the proposed development would <br />be very possessive of the open space and want to keep it private. He <br />advocated no concrete sidewalk around the park. <br /> <br />MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KUESTER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER REITSMA TO <br />ACCEPT 12.06 ACRES OF WOODED OPEN SPACE AND REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER TO <br />CONSTRUCT A BITUMINOUS TRAIL ON THE INTERIOR PORTION OF THE LOOP ROAD <br />WITH A TRAIL TO COUNTY ROAD NO.1 IN AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC ACCESS. THE <br />MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.