3/10/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MAR i®1992 @OOK �PAGE A felt these items are referred to in the Comp Plan but not in the recommendation as such. Commissioner Scurlock thought the Comp Plan gives first consideration to multi -use properties. If a property is for recreation only, it would not be placed on the list. Mr. DeBlois said that in his experience if a piece of property is completely for recreation purposes and does not necessarily have an environmental land tinge to it, the general opinion of LAAC has been that this should go before the Parks and Recreation Committee. Commissioner Bird presented a situation where we determine a need for a site for some recreational purpose and identify a general area and a general size whereby that property could be subject to acquisition by these funds that are being generated. However, there are some people who may feel very strongly about environmental preservation who would see the development of the site in the active recreation manner as being at cross purposes. They would not want the trees taken down to build ballfields and tennis courts. Mr. Keating agreed and stated that the recreation element of the Comp Plan differentiates between resource-based recreation and activity -based recreation. Many times environmentally sensitive land acquisition is compatible with the recreation element but the resource-based recreation is not; therefore it is one criterion on the land acquisition matrix to the extent that the committee is looking at some of the higher priority objectives in the plans, such as meeting our environmentally sensitive land acquisition objectives. In dealing with a funding source that has been limited to the higher priority objectives in the plan, the committee has focused on environmentally sensitive land. Mr. Keating stated that he had always assumed that if land was acquired for additional active recreation, we would have a different funding source, and to the extent the land acquisition advisory committee would be involved in site selection and actual acquisition, it would have to work with the Parks and Recreation Committee. Chairman Eggert wanted to avoid problems in the future where we may buy land without going through the Land Acquisition Advisory Committee because we feel it is mostly for another purpose but LAAC members may feel they should have looked at. Commissioner Scurlock felt the primary goal has been and should be acquisition of environmentally sensitive land and properties that are about to disappear, followed by .property with joint use as passive recreation. In that way recreation is considered as an additional asset as opposed to the primary reason for buying it in the first place. 20