pf_03172 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

" 6. In 1998, staff and consultants held a public meeting for the development of a potential Master Plan. The following issues were discussed during this process: . Keeping as much natural space as possible. . Providing buffers to adjoining properties. . Providing play areas for children including teens. . Providing a trail through the park. . Providing a basketball court. . Providing a corner plaza area. . Keeping the hockey rink, . Adding an upgraded park building. PLANNING SEGMENTS 1. Neighborhood Interests A. Desire for neighborhood park- Since the inception of the process to change the use of the Lexington and B property by the school district, the neighborhood has steadfastly requested that the entire parce: be a park. A neighborhood area association was formed as a result of this interest. B. Mitigation of use impacts- A major concern expressed by neighbors in a series of neighborhood meetings has been the impact that additional development would have on the surrounding residential areas. C. Buffering adjacent densities- The surrounding land uses of the three additional corners and the major transportation arteries of Lexington and County Road Ball bring significant traffic, noise and visual disruption into the area. The neighborhood has requested a designed park that would help to mitigate those factors. 2. Planning System Framework A. Parks and Recreation Commission (System Plan)- Since the initial plan to exchange property with Roseville Lutheran Church, the Parks and Recreation Commission has recommended the parcel at B and Lexington be eight acres of park. The primary reason is that this space now serves as Planning District 13 major park service center as a result of the exchange at Bruce Russell Park. B. Planning Commission- The Planning Commission, in the latest version of the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, has recommended that this parcel be re- zoned for all park. C. Parks and Recreation Infrastructure Committee- The Committee's final report recommends that the entire 8-acre parcel be park land. 3. Economic Enhancement Feasibilities A. Lessening of purchase cost- Since the decision to acquire the entire 8 acre park, there have been discussions about the possibilities of using an complementary development that work with the park and that the proceeds could be used to offset the cost of the acquisition of the land. B. On-going Operations - Likewise, interest was expressed in finding a mechanism whereby private compatible development could provide an ongoing revenue stream to offset the ongoing operational costs of maintaining the park.