Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.' <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />March, 2001 <br />I <br /> <br />£!!,v of Paris <br /> <br />Study of Lake Crook <br /> <br />3.2.2 Recommendations Concerning Öption 1. The consultant, recognizing that the plan has <br />significant environmental attraction to it by preserving vast amounts of ground for wildlife habitat; <br />cannot support Option 1 as configured now. The cost per lot is too high to make it a viable <br />projeèt. We could support t~e project more if the West Shore part of this option \vere not <br />included due to the poor access along the county road. Soil conditions and high water table make <br />it difficult to maintain a high quality, heavy trafficked road along the wetlands on both sides of <br />Caviness Road. Since it is not in the city limits, but borders the city limits, it is unlikely the <br />county will expend vast amounts of money to upgrade this road. <br /> <br />We further could support Option 1 if the development of the commercial tract \vould be deleted <br />ftom consideration and left in a natural state for several years to come. Without the West Shore <br />development, the commercial tract development would be seriously impeded. <br /> <br />Whereas private roads on the north shore could reduce initial costs of construction and defer city <br />maintenance ofpaving and drainage for years to come, \ve believe the citizens are not best served <br />by prohibiting ftee and uninterrupted use of a road along the shoreline. A north shore <br />development should be designed to later extend streets and utilities north into other lands when <br />these other tracts are developed. <br /> <br />Finally, if the \vest shore and the commercial tract were not developed, \ve can support the <br />concept ofrenewing leases to the gun and archery clubs feeling they \vould no longer be a hazard <br />to any nearby homes. <br /> <br />3.3 <br /> <br />OPTION 2 - FULL RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN <br /> <br />3.3.1 Description of Option 2. This option <br />provides for the immediate development of certain <br />tracts of land, especially the south shore park, as <br />formal park improvements \vith improved fishing <br />piers, campgrounds, playgrounds, group picnic <br />shelters, family picnic shelters and tables. Other <br />areas would be left undeveloped and promoted as <br />váldlife habitat and hunting property, The archery <br />and gun clubs could retain their leases and ranges <br />under this option with some re~trictions, Longer <br />leases (twenty or more years) would encourage <br />these clubs to make more meaningful investments <br />into the property in time and money. Short term <br />leases (year to year) will discourage this investment <br />entirely. <br /> <br />Expansion of a hiking/biking trail along the north <br />shore is shown in this option, looping all the way <br />around the dam and spillway and tying back into <br />the developed south shore park. These trails would <br /> <br />Page 26 of 45 <br /> <br /> <br />, i <br />" "I <br />, <br />Thi.1 Par\: will bto. Iccktd during the boars or .~) <br />IO:<JO p.Jl'l, Ib G;C)4) I.M. ' <br />T!rt "~I1I31üi ! I.J un ~ pl1k herOIc r~ÙI' is ßt r:estJ." <br />Aayoae Io<Ud i. I~ park din J>:CO p.=. Þ1)' CCClt.ad:': <br />tJu~ W2ttf Tratz::t:( Pb:IC a( ';$-4-%41)4 or . <br />t~ Puis Polit, Dep&..tllud It iSt.&1!ð3. ,:? <br />~, ,:tIlIft~ t!óI ~:. Ia! jIIOjIdIlt tt.I W. r,. M u,¡,:~ <br />Ikmal" Am tli ~ J1\w1TI4 ~ ,...1i2I* "no rvle ud .~~; <br />.fONI:øz_~~~ :tlSS-õ5IJ ElL zs¡) , . '\""",~.' <br />. ,.:t~ <br />'. . '::::~¡ <br /> <br />, . ""~' <br /> <br />