Laserfiche WebLink
II; . ' <br />^. I r-m <br />*:^.-.-r- <br />^:i' <br />fc; <br />■■■ _' <br />r.K. <br />'. J'-rr:•■■"'' ’• ■•.'• <br />.■:S <br />;Q:'i:.r‘»C-^;v>. <br />i■;^.I; <br />■ <br />pi!- <br />‘.V**. ' <br />1%:'/l^'P-P:- <br />f' <br />|v.: <br />Pi, <br />p- - .' • <br />!^W;„ <br />V ,.,^>* <br />rr-.;v <br />It ' ■ <br />* ' -!'.‘:/r <br />■,w- <br />i tI ,rrI *- ’'r,:! i> /^— w._ [ n Lr 0 <br />MINUTES OF THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 2, 1992 <br />CLIFF OTTEN SUBDIVISION - CONT. <br />Chair Flint reviewed that If Parcel B and C were not being divided <br />8t this time, Parcel A would not be considered at all for park <br />dedication because it is merely a lot line rearrangement. <br />Vongries noted the exclusion of Parcel A will not dramatically <br />affect the City, but may deter the applicant from continuing. <br />However, he reminded them that they cannot consider the person <br />repuesting and noted they should consider the precedent they are <br />setting. <br />Chair Flint stated that Otten doesn’t want to pay the park <br />dedication fee t't this time, the application could be changed to <br />a lot line rearrangement. <br />Johnston suggested they assign dedication for only 2 acres of the <br />14 acre parcel and collect the remainder at the time of a future <br />subdivision of the property. <br />Vongries felt they could not do that. <br />WlIson stated she had a probIem reouesting so much money from <br />someone who is not developing the lane further. <br />Johnston disagreed and stated they cannot distinguish between the <br />two scenarios. <br />Chair Flint felt park dedication should net be required for Parcel <br />A. <br />Johnston asked If the developer of Sugarwoods came in with a <br />proposaI to rearrange all lot lines, how the Commission felt about <br />reassessing park dedication fees. <br />Chair Flint felt they would not be charged additional money. <br />It was moved by Johnston, seconded by Vongries, to recommend the <br />application be considered as a subdivision for park dedication <br />purposes, and to request payment of a park dedication fee in Iieu <br />cf park land dedicated. <br />It was moved by Bradley, seconded by WiIson, to amend the motion <br />to clarify that the subdivision is between Parcel B and C. Ayes <br />3, nays 4. Motion failed. <br />The Commission voted on the original motion. Ayes 7, nays 0. <br />i-.