Laserfiche WebLink
PRD #27 <br />VN-206 <br />Page #8 <br />3. Grading-of Park - A question was raised at the Planning <br />Commission .meeting regarding the possible grading of <br />the park. It would make sense to do the park site <br />work at the same time the streets and other adjacent. <br />properties are being completed. <br />On June 6th the Park Board took action to state that a 5 acre <br />park at this site is consistent-with their park policies. The <br />Planning Commission reviewed the plans on the basis of a 5 to <br />5.2 acre park, and all discussion at their meeting was on the <br />assumption of 5 acres for a public park. The revised preliminary <br />plat indicates that the proposed park is 4.8 acres. While the <br />deviation is very small (8,700 sq. ft. less than 5 acres) I <br />feel that a minimum of 5 acres should be accepted for a public <br />park, for the .following reasons: <br />,1. Both the Planning Commission and Park Board are <br />recommending a minimium of 5 acres. <br />2. All recent discussions and meetings have indicated- <br />the park was to be 5 acres in size. <br />3. The City policy.is to have public parks a minimum <br />of 5 acres. In fact, all but-one of .the existing <br />City Parks. are 5+ acres, and the lone exception has <br />frequently been cited as being too small. <br />It would appear to me 'that additional square footage could be <br />obtained by eliminating one of the proposed. duplex buildings, <br />preferably a building adjacent to the proposed northern cul-de- <br />sac. A positive aspect of this 2-unit reduction is increased park <br />space and increased open space adjacent to the northern cul-de- <br />sac. <br />E. Type of llniis Proposed <br />As indicated, single.-family homes, duplexes-and a condominium <br />are being proposed. <br />-The 8 single family homes are shown adjacent to 29th Avenue which <br />is consistent with everything heard at the Planning Commission <br />meetings. <br />Duplex units are shown adjacent to the two proposed cul-de-sacs. <br />There was a great amount of discussion at previous meetings in <br />regard to a desire to have each side o.f the duplex. available <br />for ownership. The applicants have therefore revised their <br />preliminary-plat to indicate the appropriate property splits to <br />accommodate the individual unit ownership. <br />It was brought out at the Planning Commission. that the clustering <br />