CC 04-21-1975 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of Special Counci I Meeting Page si~( April 21,1975 In discussion of landscape requirements, it was notedthctt Ord. 147 ,-equires 2 '~rees of 2" diar,leter. Vogl said that Adams has agreed to comply with the landscap~ architects' recommendations (Wehrman- Chapman office) to incorpo,-ate 30 trees of 2i" diameter as designated on his original landscape plan. (Fre'dlund explained that the reason for the 30 - 2t" tree recommendation was to provide shade trees throughout the park and sti II stay within the budget, as per Planning Commission's recommendation. Counci I did not feel budget should be a consideration. In review of original Illndsca~e pllln, 449 trees - 2 Inches In diameter are required. . Counci I noted that the present system was tested and approved for first 51 lots only - test has not been made re aiequacy of system to serve additional units - original Special Use Permi t requi red <l new well and pump. Section 4.4 (a) In discussion re recreational area. Voal doscribed recreational park al"80 to be approxllllllttily 31 acres - additional acreage i~ nOt' avai lable (6 acres ,..qui I-ed) - Adams agrees ;'0 in:i'i'",ii park equl pment etc. as recommended by i'he Parks Commi ttee (Minutes of Jan. 21, 1975) - Vi II age to maintain recr'eatlonal park. Councl I noted that the equipment and installation is to be In accordance with specifications proposed by Buckley. Ii' was also noted that an amended lease 1'11'1 be necessary - present lease does not al low use of recrea~ion area by the pub I I c. Sect! on 4.7 lan.dscape requirement of 50' minimum depth and 5' high fence and 2t plantlngs are required around perimeter of the park - original plan was approved .lith 20' landscClped depth and no fence. Yogi said developer cannot comply with fence requirement because of prohibitive costs, and lots and uti litles prohibit a landscaping depth of 50' around the park perimeter. Counci I noted that original plan did not indicate a fence, but was nevertheless required by the Special Use PermIt and Ord. 147. Council I,ndicated the need for fsncirg, at least along Highway 96, for protection of young chi IdrE,n. Seci'ion 4.8 Counci I indicated way wi dths. ~.Ec .k-- there.no problem with road and drlve- Section 4.9 Public-access to park was discussed and parking adequacy during ti mes r'scl-eati ona I park i So used for games etc. . Ad.ms stated that no parking is permitted on streets In the park by res I dents - guest parking is penillt1'ed; parki ng area around community building provIdes parldng for 6-8 cars; suggested parking on one side of street, enforced by Pol Ice Department, in area of the recr'aationa! park (public access). Section 4.11 No Councl I co,:ce,n1' expressed re sidewalk width. Section 4.12 COllnci I requested net figures, re shelt0r area. Section 4.13 Counci~fei{ one fire extinguisher ,-+.'" ~ I,~ pe,- unit" sl\sufficlent. -6-