My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-27-1994 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
07-27-1994 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/7/2013 2:00:54 PM
Creation date
10/7/2013 1:53:43 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
244
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 />City Council <br />October 14, 1987 <br />Centerville <br />Road Park <br />Proposal <br />(Cont.) <br />Blesener stated that he supported the Attorney's negotiating for <br />option agreements, but at this point did not support the City's <br />purchase of the full 33.88 acres. Blesener stated that he was in <br />favor of a park somewhere in size between the first and second <br />concept, based on the amount of money the land will cost and what <br />the City can afford. <br />Blesener agreed that if the property is purchased, the City will have <br />to sit down with the adjacent property owners and work out a plan <br />that . everyone can live with. <br />Blesener agreed that the proposal would be taking quite a bit of <br />property off the tax rolls, however, the Council should consider <br />the quality of life in the City and felt that better amenities will <br />entice better development. <br />Fahey agreed. Fahey also felt that the Park Commission should be <br />authorized to begin full -scale study of the proposal. <br />Scalze did not feel it was anyone's intent that Little Canada had <br />to have the biggest and best park available. However, Scalze <br />felt a park is needed in the area. The City must be fiscally <br />responsible as well. Scalze stated that the selling price of <br />the property will determine the size of the park. The City only <br />has so much money. Scalze felt that the City has worked a long <br />time to get park land, pointing out that other cities purchased <br />their park land in the 1950's and 1960's. <br />Scalze stated that she was not looking at only today, but at the <br />next 20 years. Scalze felt that the City must be responsible and <br />buy only the land it needs. <br />Scalze also felt the City had a good record in working with the <br />neighbors of other park sites in the City. <br />LaValle reported that he supported the comments of Blesener and <br />Scalze, and felt that concepts 1 and 2 were preferable. <br />Fahey felt the negotiations with the property owners would be a <br />fairly lengthy procedure and there will be sufficient time for <br />input from adjacent property owners. <br />Collova stated that he was in favor of the park proposal, but felt <br />33.88 acres might be excessive. Collova stated that the City will <br />have to take a realistic look at the price of the land. Collova <br />also felt that there were other options for the land besides <br />ballfields, and felt these needed to be considered. <br />Fahey stated that he questioned the need for 300 foot ballfields, <br />and the need for involvement in adult ball tournaments. Fahey <br />agreed that the property should be used for multi - purpose recreation. <br />Page -10- <br />Page 230 <br />( <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.