PRECA 12-05-1979 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Concept Discussion J.A. Cadwallader Page ~2 PARK PROPERTY During the~time the School Board was accepting bids on-the. property • a preliminary survey of :.the park land.was -taken. The boundary lines that were drawn are not indicated on the attached site plan because those boundaries are still negoitable. The Park Board should make a recommendation based on tfi a existing facilities and needs to. where those boundaries should be drawn. The residents in the area have voiced~a concern that the park property remain and that present facilities are not reduced in size or number.- The City Council :h as'also~expressed a committment to the park property. The Board should formally refer the PRD proposal to the Park Board and staff to review and comment at its .next regular meeting in December. The response from the Park Board should give the Board of Review a better indication of the park needs before the Board of'Review's next meeting on the application. For the Boards' information the tennis courts and .ball diamond are denoted on the site sketch. The play area with respective equip- ment is located to the east of the ball diamond and does not appear on the sketch. CONVERSION OF EXISTING SCHOOL STRUCTURE A sketch of the layout of the existing school facility is attached for examination. The building is built on 3 different .levels. The classrooms lend themselves to conversion because of the size of the rooms and the fact that for :the most .part water and-sewer lines run between the different levels. "The gymnasium, the .large room on the southern part of this'iayout, is proposed to be converted into 2 or 3 two story units because of the height of the-room. ~- There are doors at the end of X11 the hallways shown..on the sketch which will facilitate the conversion. The zoning code requires two parking spaces for each of these units and at least half of the required number of spaces must be enclosed. The applicant has stated that he will construct garacJes on the west side of the structure. The .applicant contends that the garages should not be next to Oakwood Drive because garages under normal deterioration will not have an acceptable appearance for persons. living in single family homes on Oakwood Drive or for persons traveling on Oakwood Drive. There have been some concern over the location of the existing parking lot adjacent to Oakwood Drive. The applicant feels that with the garages on the other: side ofthe structure the parking lot would be used by guests or second cars for the tenants. This parking lot has been in existnece for some time and the applicant has expressed that the proposed us.e of the property will not adversely change .the usage of the parking lot.