New Search
Johnny R wrote: <br /> > Hi Nancy, <br /> > There isn't any current action taking place by Parks Planning staff to <br /> > acquire this property. In exploring possibilities last year, John Matott <br /> > had talked with Parks Planning staff about the City taking on a small part <br /> > of the parcel. At the time, he was interested in how a undevelopable <br /> > portion might be made attractive enough to become a park. What the City <br /> > would have obtained in that scenario was a relatively steep sloping site, <br /> > street frontage on the high side, surrounded otherwise by residential <br /> > development with a possible ped access from the street behind houses on the <br /> > downhill side. The site is fairly heavily wooded and would make a nice <br /> > small natural area but is undesirable for a neighborhood park. Development <br /> > of any level recreation space on this site would be costly. <br /> > The Parks and Recreation Plan calls for the acquisition and development of <br /> a <br /> > neighborhood park in this general area and as such we could propose the use <br /> > of Parks System Development Charge (SDC) for partial funding for <br /> > acquisition of a neighborhood park. However the terrain of what has been <br /> > offered to date wouldn't work well for this and I don't believe the SDC <br /> > methodology supports using this funding source for the purchase of open <br /> > space. Since there has not been a funding source identified which we could <br /> > use for the acquisition of the full 12 acre parcel, staff has not performed <br /> > extensive research on the site. However, staff feels that the northwestern <br /> > portion on which housing was previously proposed would likely work for <br /> > development as a neighborhood park. <br /> > . <br /> > No discussions have taken place with the developers regarding trades for <br /> > other lands. Unfortunately, any of the lands that have been talked about <br /> > as being "surplus park land" are in other parts of town and are relatively <br /> > small. (I don't believe all of them together total 12 acres.) Just as <br /> > an off -hand idea, if a rebalancing of parkland within this ward were to <br /> > become a possibility, some attention might be given to Hawkins Heights Park <br /> > ( 7 +- acres) and Melvin Miller Park (12 +- acres) which are located <br /> > approximately a block apart.. If requested, we could make an assessment <br /> > whether any of either park could be traded without too much loss in park <br /> > value for what remains. <br /> > I hope this has been helpful. <br /> > Thanks <br /> > Johnny. <br /> > P.S. Nancy, I understand you have already or are going to be talking <br /> > directly to Jean for a more extensive briefing, however for the people cc'd <br /> > this memo, I've attached the below note from Jean Hahn for background. <br /> > From: HAHN Jean K <br /> > To: MEDLIN Johnny R <br /> > Subject: Somerset Hills property <br /> > Date: Tuesday, November 15, 1994 10:50AM <br /> > Johnny: With regard to the property at the southeast corner of Timberline <br /> > and Wilshire Drive (also known as Phase 5 of the Somerset Hills PUD , PD <br /> > 73 -12), here is some info you requested. The property is still owned by <br /> > Breeden Bros. John Matott has been in negotiations with Breeden to <br /> purchase <br /> > the land. No purchase by Matott has occurred to date. (This info was <br /> Page 4 <br />