Laserfiche WebLink
267 <br /> <br /> Ms. Terner responded that the park currently serves about 900 <br />cars and that the plan proposes a maximum of around 1,080; there <br />would be n~ entrance for either cars or pedestrians on the south <br />side. She continued that while there is a plan to relocate the <br />main entrance to relieve the congestion on Stanley Blvd., by <br />providing a long entry road to accommodate traffic on peak days, <br />walk-in access would still be allowed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr inquired if they knew what percentage of the park's <br />clientele came from the Tri-Valley area and if the particular <br />needs of the area were considered when the uses of the park were <br />identified. <br /> <br /> Ms. Terner answered that they did not have the exact <br />percentage of Tri-Valley users but that some specific surveys done <br />on peak days indicated that they comprise a high percentage. She <br />added that they considered a 30-mile radius for the development <br />plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes asked what action the EBRPD Board took on this <br />and the Currin properties. <br /> <br /> Ms. Combs replied that the Board agreed by resolution to <br />submit jointly annexation for Shadow Cliffs and the property <br />west of Castlewood, which is the Currin property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes inquired if the Council could initiate any action <br />on the annexation issue, and if so, when could it be done. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush pointed out that the Council's action at its last <br />meeting was to support the annexation of the Currin property at <br />the first opportunity, and the developer has initiated the <br />appropriate action to bring the matter to the Council. The action <br />taken by the EBRPD Board is similar; the Board would now have to <br />provide the City with a formal request for annexation, after which <br />annexation procedures will be formally initiated. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked if it would be necessary for requests from <br />both the EBRPD and Currin to come before the Council together. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush replied that this would be necessary as they are <br />the respective property owners. He added, however, that he does <br />not foresee any hindrance to having this come before the Council <br />in September, as the EBRPD has already taken appropriate action, <br />and ongoing correspondence between the City staff and the Currin <br />property owners will accomplish the same thing. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer expressed concern about EBRPD allowing some input <br />from the Park and Recreation Commission and its willingness to <br />work with the Council on the annexation of the Currin property and <br />Shadow Cliffs. <br /> <br /> -4- <br /> <br /> 8-15-89 <br /> <br /> <br />