06-02-1997 Park Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGt1LAR�RQNO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JCTNE 2, 1947 (#2 - Saga Hiil Subdivision Sketch Plan Review -Continued) Application#2240 is for a 28 acre subdivision to the north of Saga Hill and meanders in and out ofthe MUSA houndary. The property is lacated within both the RR-1B (nan- M[JSA) and LR-1B (ML1SA}zoning districts. The applicant proposes a cul-de-sac to the right of the lats branching off to the west and then down to the southern boundary of the properties to provide access from the south. This would result, however, in a long cul-de- sac. The Planning Cammission tabled this application for further review and possible clustering shawn in a new layout. Due to the topography of the land, Gaffron said the properties would require sewering. This would require a change ta the MUSA boundary. The lots would abut the proposed parking area for the park land to the south. The Park Commissian was asked to consider whether Park Dedication should be in the form af land or fee. Gaffron indicated that the proposed plans may change. He explained the different optians for access. Jim Waters said he would support the Staff proposal for the roadway to serve the park parcets. He noted the problem whether the properties could be sewered and the dedicated access. He noted Garden Lane could be extended to Highview or be moved separating the two park parcels and sewering the parcels to the north. Waters said another solutiQn would be clustering of the homes and dedicating the higher topography land for park. Issues involved would again be zoning and sewering. He felt the options are gossible from a design and engineering standpoint. He would continue review with Staff and consider different agproaches. Waters asked for a sense of direction from the Park Commission regarding Park Dedication. There were no public comments at this time. Wilson asked for Park Commission camments. McDermott said the Park Dedication af land ar fee would depend on the plans themselves. If the plans are as proposed, McDermott said he would like the road to access the park property or pravide a walking path. If Garden Lane were to separate the park parcels, McDermott said he preferred the fee taken. Welles asked if the applicant was satisfied with the Stafl's groposal. Waters said he found the proposed solutions reasanable. Gaffron indicated that the City would not be interested in vacating Garden lane as access to the park land is required. He noted it was questionable whether access could be provided to the Hennessey property from Garden Lane. Wilsan asked if there were any other possibilities for access to the Hennessey property. Gat�ron said there were not any other possibilities as access from the north is practically impossible due to the topography of the land. 2