My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2020_0622_CCPacket
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2020
>
2020_0622_CCPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2020 3:49:41 PM
Creation date
6/18/2020 3:47:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
6/22/2020
Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
494
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />RCA Attachment D <br />41 5) PARK DEDICATION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION – LEXINGTON WOODS – <br />42 SE CORNER OF LEXINGTON AVE. AND COUNTY ROAD C2 <br />43 Both Chair Hoag and staff reviewed the role of the Parks and Recreation Commission in the Park <br />44 Dedication process. The role of the Commission is to review and make recommendations to the City <br />45 on Park Dedication matters only, namely whether to take land or cash to satisfy the requirement. <br />46 Staff reviewed the Park Dedication process, history, purpose and options with the Commission. <br />47 <br />48 The City received an application from the Civic Site Group to develop the property on the southeast <br />49 corner of Lexington Ave. and Co. Rd. C2. The proposal summary for Lexington Woods includes: <br />50 <br />51 Qualifies for Park Dedication <br />52 Total Acreage = 4.95 <br />53 20 new lots <br />54 Cash Amount $80,000 ($4,000 x 20) <br />55 Land Requirement = .495 <br />56 Land Proposal = 1.5 acres new information from the developers is that they will include an <br />57 additional 3 lots = 2.19 acres <br />58 <br />59 Developers Matt Pavek and Peter Knaeble joined the call to discuss the additional acreage option <br />60 with the Commission. They also noted that there is land contamination on a portion of the proposed <br />61 Park Dedication parcel. <br />62 <br />63 Commissioner Arneson asked what the city would need to move forward with the land knowing it is <br />64 contaminated. Staff responded that the city would need to do due diligence of the property prior to <br />65 accepting the land to understand the possibilities for future park amenities. <br />66 <br />67 Commissioner Heikkila examined the sidewalk connection options (C2 to Woodhill) and the need <br />68 for soil remediation. Staff responded that the C2 to Woodhill connection is not contingent on the <br />69 acceptance of Park Dedication land. <br />70 <br />71 Commissioner O’Brien asked what a space like this could potentially be used for if land is chosen. <br />72 Staff responded that it could be left as wooded space, add trails, benches or flowers. <br />73 <br />74 Commissioner Brown noted that he appreciated the potential for additional greenspace in the <br />75 community. <br />76 <br />77 Commissioner O’Brien stated that she has trouble being excited about taking contaminated land for <br />78 this development as there is already an abundance of land in this quadrant of the city. <br />79 <br />2 <br />Page 4 of 33 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.