My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
100396
ConejoRPD
>
Public Access
>
Archive
>
Board Meetings
>
Minutes
>
1996
>
100396
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/12/2016 6:34:54 PM
Creation date
8/12/2016 6:34:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board
Document Type
Minutes
Date
10/3/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Minutes 10-3-96 <br />Page 2 <br />In response to Board inquiries, Sorensen said that staff could <br />prepare and present a report to the Board in November. Ward <br />summarized that a polarization of views appears to have <br />developed concerning the leash -free dog park; the Board <br />granted conceptual approval for staff to study the issue; the <br />Bark and Park group supports Triunfo Park as the site; no <br />commitment to a specific site has been made; the Board and <br />Chair have the opportunity to determine the timing and process <br />under which the matter is agendized for consideration; meeting <br />notification would include all homes within a 300 foot radius <br />of the park and should include sign postings as well; the <br />local homeowners association has decided to forgo the cost of <br />a survey of all homeowners and its Board of Directors will <br />determine the association's position; staff has identified <br />both positive and negative aspects of the bark park concept <br />plus concerns specific to the Triunfo site. <br />Jacobsen said that staff needs sufficient time to develop <br />criteria, identify site alternatives, prepare a Board <br />presentation, and invite interested parties; and, in the <br />interim to reduce homeowner anxiety, staff should communicate <br />the process to be followed and the fact that the site is, as <br />yet, undetermined. Berger and Lange concurred that staff be <br />allowed adequate preparation time. <br />Gillette suggested that, to alleviate community anxiety, a <br />discussion item, not a public hearing, be agendized at staff's <br />discretion, and the public be duly noticed and assured that <br />nothing will happen without the public's participation and <br />knowledge. <br />In response to Gillette's inquiry, Sorensen said that the <br />staff report was not site specific, but for accounting <br />purposes, the allocation of funds was. Ward reiterated that <br />the Triunfo site is not the only site being considered. <br />Gillette noted that Louanne Phillips submitted a written <br />statement card stating her opposition to the bark park at <br />Triunfo Park. <br />5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA <br />It was moved by Holt, seconded by Berger, and carried <br />unanimously, to approve the agenda as presented. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.