Laserfiche WebLink
MI NUT1:S <br />City Council <br />May 12' 1482 <br />Park Commission <br />(Cont.) Mrs. Scalze commented Ckiat the ordinance has been disputed and disc~issed <br />many Cimes. 'i'here are me~iCS on both si.des. However, it is an o~d'anance <br />that the C~ty has on the books. <br />A member of the audience stated that she £el.t the City was makirig i~ <br />har.d for ind'a.vS.dual homeocaners anci busi.nesses to come into the CiCy. <br />It was suggested that the Council review this ordinance again, <br />M~s. Scalze infoxmed the audience of L•he parl[ char~;es Chat other <br />cita.es have adopted. <br />The Council was asked if anyone has done a survey of the use that Ci~y <br />parks geC pu~ to, Mayor Hanson stated that the C~.ty did do such a <br />survey and only received about 50 responses. Hanson also sCaCed that <br />he was never willing Co support a$300 paxk charge £or an individua7. <br />homeowner, but was more in Eavor of a$100 parlc charge, <br />A member o£ the audience stated that the City zs surrounded with <br />beautiful parlcs in ~he surrounding communities, She questioned why <br />the City would chaxge the people uf Little Canada a park chaxge. <br />Mxs. Nardini commented on the park system tkzat itoseville has. Mx, <br />Foxsberg staLed that it cosCS a 7.ot o£ money to maintai.n Roseville~s <br />parks. <br />Mr, Fahey stated that he £eels Little Canada has a need for a park, <br />A member of the audience suggesCed that the Council put the i.ssue. of <br />a park on the refexrendum, The City Clerk replied that only certain <br />issues can be put to a ceferrendum. <br />Mr. F'ahey stated that the issue of a$100 or $300 paxk charge ha~ been <br />dis(nzted back and £or.~h. <br />hir. Fahey staCed that the 10% paxk charge for subd'zvi;~ions is a lot of <br />maney and suggested Chat Che Council. take another look at it, <br />Mr. i~orsbexg stated that the City sometimes assumes that developers <br />have alot of money and thas is not always true, <br />Mxs. Scalze suggested Lhat the ACtoxney revLew the Citys ordinance ~o <br />see i£ S.t conforms to 5tate standards, <br />The A~torney commeqted that it a.s permissa.ble to require par.k land as <br />a p~xrk charge rather than cash, 'The ACtorney also stated that the S~ate <br />law does not answer the questi,on oP the def9.niti.on of a subdivSsion. <br />As af 1980 the State law requires a11 subdivisi.ons of five or mor.e lots, <br />2 1/2 acres or smalLer in size be platted, <br />kfrs. Scalze sugges~ed that sh~ research the matter and discuss zt <br />with the CiCy Attorney. <br />Yage -21- <br />