My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-27-1991 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
11-27-1991 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/16/2014 11:28:27 AM
Creation date
7/23/2013 1:53:15 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
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
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />NOVEMBER 14, 1991 <br />The Planner noted that each commission has a certain <br />amount of separateness. Without this, there would only <br />be the need for one commission. The Park Master Plan <br />provides the Planning Commission with the Park <br />Commission's thoughts on the City's park system. This <br />tool can then be used by the Planning Commission in <br />considering future development proposals within the <br />City. <br />Drabik pointed out that the Park Commission has looked <br />at otherwise unusable land within the City, and tried <br />to incorporate that land into the City's park system. <br />Drabik felt this was a creative use of land that <br />otherwise was not good for anything else. <br />DeLonais pointed out the size of Pioneer Park. <br />Drabik stated that she felt Pioneer Park did not need <br />to be as large as it is. However, Drabik pointed out <br />that the City was informed that this property was <br />unbuildable. <br />DeLonais disagreed that the property was unbuildable, <br />and pointed out the source of that information. <br />Drabik asked if the Park Master Plan had been adopted <br />and it showed recommendations for access trails, what <br />the effect on a development such as Costa Estates would <br />be <br />The Planner agreed that had an access trail to Pioneer <br />Park coming from the east had been included in a Park <br />Master Plan, the developer would have been put on <br />notice that this was the City's position. This is an <br />example of the value that a Park Master Plan has to the <br />Planning Commission, so that it can identify these <br />kinds of issues. It also lets developers know the <br />City's expectations of them. <br />Keis noted that current ordinance requires that <br />developers dedicate either 10% of their land to the <br />City's park system, or $400 per residential lot. <br />The City Planner agreed, but stated that to show future <br />proposed park development in a Park Master Plan is much <br />more valuable to the City. The Planner also stated <br />that it will reduce the cost of development because <br />developers know what is expected of them initially, and <br />this will also result in a reduction in City review <br />costs. The Planner stated that the problem with the <br />City's current Comprehensive Plan is that sometimes <br />staff has to be speculative because the plan is so <br />out -of -date. <br />Page 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.