05-08-2007 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Plamung Commission Minutes May 8, 2007 Page 2 the staff report, and a 9th condition to address the City Engineer's comments in his memo dated May 7, 2007. Mr. Barnhart noted that the issue addressed in the May 7~h memo is not new and the applicant was aware of it. Mr. Barnhart provided clarification for Commissioner Scott regarding the easements for trail and shared access. Chair Stevens asked if there is a plan to put in a trail in the near future, and if the County will need to approve such a trail. Mr. Barnhart stated that he does not know the timing of trail construction, and that it would likely be a joint effort for the City and County to install a trail. Chair Stevens opened the public hearing. Pete Rohlf, applicant -Stated that he was not aware of the 10-foot trail recommendation by the Parks & Recreation Cotntnission, before this evening's meeting. He stated that the County has requested an additional 17 feet ofright-of--way to increase it from 33 feet to 50 feet, and the additional 10 feet for a trail makes a total of 60 feet of his property being taken. He stated that it is not likely the city could acquire the additional 10 feet of trail easement from all of the properties along Meadowvale Road, due to the location of homes. Mr. Barnhart stated that the 10-foot trail easement will not be "taken" and will still be the applicant's property. Mr. Barnhart explained that the right-of--way is measured from the centerline and the trail will be located outside of the right-of--way. Mr. Rohlf stated that he already must pay park dedication for the two lots being created ($6,600). Mr. Barnhart stated that the park fee is consistent with development of all new lots in the city. He explained that it sometimes is more appropriate to require park land, rather than cash dedication, when larger parcels are developed. Mr. Barnhart stated that he understood Mr. Rohlf's concerns, but that the city's park system has needs which must be met through the park dedication funds. Chair Stevens suggested the application could be tabled to explore the park dedication issue further. Mr. Barnhart stated that the Parks & Recommendation Commission recommendation is straightforward and he suggested that the Commission move the request on to the City Council with their recommendation. There being no further public comment, Chair Stevens closed the public hearing. Commissioner Lemke asked for clarification on park dedication requirements. Mr. Barnhart explained that no park dedication is being required for the existing lot which was platted in 1974, only for the two new lots. He noted that the trail easement will not show up on the plat and is processed as an easement agreement. Commissioner Lemke stated that it appears to be a very large amount ofright-of--way, and suggested that the county be contacted regarding the possibility of locating the trail within the county right-of--way. He suggested that the plat request be moved on to the City Council and there would still be time to research the issue further before the meeting. Mr. Barnhart stated that it is not a large amount of property, and would benefit the city as a whole to provide a trail at some point in the future. He noted that it takes time to assembly all the pieces for a trail system, and that when smaller pieces are developed along the trail route, they are "hit" harder than larger ones. Commssioner Westgaard stated he had no issues with subdivision of the property. He stated that the recommendations by the county and Parks & Recreation Cotntnission are outside of the Planning Commission's venue, and suggested that the applicant take up the right-of--way and trail easement issues with the City Council. Commissioner Westgaard