Laserfiche WebLink
Gerald Kaufhold, Case. 1830 Page 3 <br />f) The scale and the location of the park make it incompatible with <br />the purpose and function of the property as originally planned in <br />the park system plan adopted by the City in 1960-61. <br />8. We understand that the proposed use of the northerly portion of the <br />site for schoul purposes by District 916 '.s proposed to continue for <br />approximately two years. There remains a very important question as <br />to the f-iture use of this land. It would be .bad public policy to make <br />a land ise commitment z.,;d change any portion of this relatively small <br />site anc leave the remainder unknown for the future. It is simply <br />delaying an important land use decision and likely makinn it more <br />difficult to achieve a compatible development on the northerly portion <br />of the site after additional single-family home owners occupy the <br />southerly portion. There is also, of course, a minor regulation detail <br />that requires a public school building not to be less than 30 feet from <br />a contiguous single-family lot. That regulation is violated. <br />9 9 Y g . <br />9. Though the land is zoned single-family (R-1), the land use plan which <br />controls the future land uses of the City still designates the land as a <br />public school. If a portion of the site is to be developed . for low <br />density residential, the land use plan should be changed accordingly. We <br />suggest that such a designation of low density residential for the area <br />of the land proposed to be platted now and leaving the remainder as a <br />public school would be very bad land planning since the days for the <br />use of the land fi ,r public school purposes are numbered. Therefore, it <br />is reasonable on the part of the City (hopefully working with the land <br />owner) to achieve an overall land use plan and development proposal <br />that . will be compatible with the considerable concentration of <br />single-family homes in the immediate vicinity and the community as a <br />whole. <br />10. The Planning Commission and Council may wish to consider an action <br />that would provide for: <br />a) A more' appropriately scaled and located park site consistent with <br />the original parks plan in the overall community interests; <br />b) A long range look at the overall land use, zoning, <br />and development of the site; <br />c) Elimination of an inadequately sized and located park for the <br />reasons as listed in this report; and <br />d) Development that would be compatible with the single-family <br />homes in the area, the traffic capacity of the street serving the <br />site, and the land use pattern as established in the contiguous <br />quadrants of the county road serving this site. <br />