Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION <br />MARCH 3, 1994 <br />developer indicated that he would dedicate Lot B to <br />Vadnais to satisfy their park charge requirements plus <br />$500 per lot. <br />Remerowski reported that Vadnais Heights has been pushing <br />the issue of public access to the lake, however, is now <br />saying that they would prefer Lot A to satisfy their park <br />charge requirements. Lot A does not have lake access. <br />However, Lot B is worthless property to the developer. <br />Remerowski reported that the Mayor of Vadnais Heights is <br />quite concerned that the City make sure it gets a fair <br />deal. <br />Wehrle pointed out that Vadnais Heights may not want to <br />lose the developer, therefore, may not pursue the <br />dedication of Lot A. <br />Remerowski felt there were a lot of developers who would <br />be interested in the property. <br />PARK CHARGE The Director submitted a survey of surrounding cities <br />showing their park charge requirements pointing out that <br />it appears Little Canada's park charge is falling behind. <br />Wehrle pointed out that the City is almost fully <br />developed and questioned the effect an increase in park <br />charge would have. <br />Johnson pointed out that a $100 increase in the City's <br />park charge would result in an additional $1,000 in <br />revenues for a 10-home development. <br />Remerowski suggested that based on the results of the <br />survey the park charge be increased to $700 or $750 per <br />lot. <br />The Director pointed out that $550 appears to be the <br />average per lot park charge. <br />Wehrle stated that he would support increasing the park <br />charge from $400 per single-family home to $550. Wehrle <br />pointed out that the park charge is a fee that developers <br />pass on to the consumer. <br />Remerowski pointed out that it is the consumer who is <br />using the park system. Remerowski did not believe $750 <br />14 <br />