Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. Staff did discuss with Mr. Husnik and Mr. Holrrquist the p:>ssibility of <br /> a resident survey to detennine their needs. No information is <br /> available as to whether this was canpleted by the park's rranagerrent. <br /> Other issues to =nsider: <br /> 1. Who will perfo:rm long-te:rm ffi3.intenance of new amenities? <br /> Olrrentl y, the pool is ffi3.intained by the rrobile hare park. <br /> The prop:>sed amenities w::JUld be located in the City <br /> easement area and w::JUld te required to be ffi3.intained by <br /> the City. <br /> 2. Should drainage improvements be considered a separate, <br /> unrelated issue? <br /> As you can see fran the attached letter fran Mr. Filla, it <br /> appears that the drainage is the llDbile hane park's <br /> resp:>nsibility. The owner feels that by improving the <br /> drainage as part of this propcsal, the recreation park <br /> will be ffi3.de available for tetter ffi3.intenance and use, <br />. thus providing additional amenities to the residents. <br /> The City Council should keep in mind that in order to amend the SUP at <br /> this tiTre, a new public hearing needs to be held. Appendix A requires <br /> a review of the request by the Planning Camlission. The earliest this <br /> could be done is August 3, 1994. I clarified this with the City <br /> Attorney to ensure that the proper legal process is followed. <br /> Other options the City Council ffi3.y wish to consider are: <br /> 1. Send this request to the Parks Camlittee for review and <br /> ccmrent. This was staff's reccnrnendation as part of <br /> Planning Case Rep:>rt #94-07. There is not a Parks <br /> Ccmnittee rreeting scheduled for July. <br /> 2. Consider the enforcement of the te:rms of the "Amended <br /> Special Use Pe:rmit" as described in the attached letter <br /> from Mr. Filla. . <br />. Attachment <br /> BF:dg <br />