Jackson’s Municipal code only allows for a four foot fence in a fifteen foot street side yard setback. There was no public comment on the issue and ultimately the Commission chose to approve the variance. The second item on the agenda attributed to the length of the meeting with plenty of public comment. The applicant, D&L Development, requested that a Condition of original approval on their Tentative Subdivision Map for their subdivision located off Scottsville Blvd in South Jackson, be amended to allow a reduction in the required community park size.

The applicant’s engineer has placed the park, in the map, along the southern border of the project. This will minimize grading and help preserve mature trees on the site. To meet the 22,000 square foot park required by the Conditions of the development’s approval, a retaining wall with a narrow strip of park extending past a proposed cul-de-sac would be necessary. Combined together, the area at the southern portion of the map along with the narrow strip would equal the 22,000 sq feet.  The applicants are requesting to reduce the required park size from 22,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet, or the size of the southern map parcel designated for the park by the developer. This would eliminate the need for the both the retaining wall and the narrow park strip.

Back in September the Planning commission approved the subdivision map for the development which allowed for two lots to be subdivided into eight single family residential lots. During that meeting concerns were brought forth by the public that the developers needed to provide an area for a park. The concern was that this developer was allowed to create Pine Meadows subdivision without a park and at that time the community no park requirement was unacceptable. 

According to the Staff Report there was not a requirement per City ordinance to create park areas within subdivisions. However, there were impact fees, at that time 1088 dollars, required to be assessed to each single family dwelling built within the City, if the developer had not provided parkland. A per capita formula, based on assumed population of the development was used to determine the size of the park. This was applied to both the Pine Meadows subdivision and the proposed Stonecreek subdivision and approval was based on the requirement that D&L Development provide a 22,000 square foot park size. The Planning Commission’s intent of the large park was to mitigate for no planned park at the neighboring Pine Meadows Subdivision. The proposed park is also proposed to be a passive park; that means that it is primarily open space and does not include recreation equipment.

The Planning Commission does have the authority to allow for the reduction in park size, but in turn, require that the park become an active park and include play equipment, walking trails, benches, etc. Public comment at the meeting expressed that the public prefers the park to remain a passive park. Ultimately, the commission decided to continue the item because they wanted to view the slope and the trees that would be preserved if a reduction in the park size is approved.