Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />Parks & Recreation Commission <br />January 6, 1994 <br />Sanders stated that he would find out who owned the other <br />property that was previously discussed on the north side of <br />the Water Works. <br />Remerowski stated that he had a problem with incurring a lot <br />of fees from Sanders' services on this proposal. He felt <br />that Rue should cover the costs. Rue stated that he would <br />work with the City, but would want to know what the <br />approximate fees would be. <br />Sanders stated that the site plan should be found first and <br />then, if needed, the area could be measured. <br />TWIN LAKE Johnson presented some background information for the new <br />1°ROPERTY Commission members on the Twin Lake Property issue. She <br />UPDATE stated that the first meeting was held of the Little Canada/ <br />Vadnais Heights Committee that was established to study the <br />use of the Twin Lake property. She indicated that the <br />meeting was basically a "free for all" where no one could <br />come to an agreement about how to use the property. She <br />stated that the goals of the two cities are too different. <br />Vadnais Heights wants an active park and Little Canada wants <br />a passive park. <br />The Director indicated that another meeting will not be <br />scheduled until a development proposal is submitted for <br />Little Canada's property. <br />Remerowski felt that the park will go in whether Little <br />Canada wants it or not since Vadnais Heights would install <br />it on their side. Therefore, he felt that Little Canada <br />should accept money for the park charge from the developer <br />instead of land for a park. He felt that the proposed park <br />land in Little Canada would still be left vacant due to the <br />easements in the area. <br />Remerowski commented that Vadnais Heights would like to put <br />a public access to the lake on Little Canada's side since <br />the lake shore is in better condition. He felt that if <br />Little Canada decides not to develop a park on their side, <br />Vadnais Heights would not pursue public access. <br />Johnson asked why there were single family homes proposed <br />for Vadnais Heights and twin homes for Little Canada. <br />Wehrle stated that the developer preferred that concept to <br />attract all types of people. <br />-5- <br />