11/27/1978 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. F. A. Sparrow, 1568 West 24th Place, requested more park benches in parks, more lights to reduce vandlism, and a better program to e reduce rubbish and trash. He said there was no need to invest money in more parks when the ones that the City has are not kept up. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Manager responded regarding the Februrary, 1978, request from Mr. Bi 11 i ngs was not ignored. The possible inaccuracy was referred to survey crews for checking. Regarding the budget and amount of money available, he said the Block Grant funding is somewhat flexible. The contingency fund refers to the Block Grant funding and is legal. Regarding whether this was a better park site than the Franz site, staff felt it was much more open and would be much less expensive to develop. Regarding the request in February for appearance before the Council, Manager said the City was in process of litigation and , negotiations and it was felt not to be an appropriate time for discussion. Mr. Haws felt the issue was not whether or not someone would get paid for this piece'of property. Rather the issue was how the park will be developed and whether or not the land will be used for housing or park land. He was in favor of park land. He fel t the evidence had shown this was the best site. Mr. Obie felt there had been enough testimony to create a question of whether or not the park should be there. He noted 140 people in the - area were opposed. He cautioned Council in its use of power of emi- nent domain. He raised the importance of the issue of the community as a whole versus individual rights. He felt there had been no testimony this evening which indicated are overriding importance of the community over the individual's rights. He felt it would be a misuse and mistake for the Council to use the power of eminent domain in this instance. He felt there was a good argument that the health, welfare, and safety of the community would be better served with multi-housing closer to the core area. He requested Council reject the continued pursuit of this property. Mr. Hamel said he had no doubt there was a need for parks in this area. However, he had never been in favor of taking property from an individual for a park, and would vote against the resolution. Mr. Delay spoke regarding a balancing situation. He no ted the Whiteaker Neighborhood had been extremely reluctant to pursue this issue because of the sensitivity to the family and the individual making use of his own property as he wanted. However, the Whiteaker Community Council was closer to the issue and had studied it more closely and had come up with its recommendations. He said the circum- stances had not changed and noted the Whiteaker Refinement Plan had e 11/27/78--10 152