My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
09-06-1979 Park Board Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Park Board
>
Park Board Meeting Minutes
>
1979 Minutes
>
09-06-1979 Park Board Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2021 3:36:18 PM
Creation date
6/4/2021 9:48:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Park Board
Park Bd Document Type
Park Board Minutes
Meeting Date
09/06/1979
Park Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Page 4 <br /> Park Board <br /> September 6, 1979 <br /> i'I, for funding because of the lack of sewer and water, and the upstairs would not have <br /> been considered because it was general use. Don Volk suggested that the Park Board <br /> find out which areas in the Metro area were categorized the same as Lino Lakes , and <br /> send those communities letters asking if they have applied for or received a LAWCON <br /> grant and if so, what was the grant awarded for; rather than working through Metro, <br /> the Park Board should work through the municipalities and also find out if they had <br /> received any grants in the past. Mrs. Liljedahl noted that there were ten areas <br /> classified general rural on the list. . It was also mentioned that these communities <br /> might not be willing to cooperate. Don Volk indicated that Anoka County was planning <br /> on spending large amounts of money on the county park in Lino Lakes , and asked if they <br /> had applied for LAWCON to cover this, as it was an active recreational use, and Anoka <br /> was considered general rural . There was some question as to whether this classifica- <br /> tion was for Anoka City or Anoka County. <br /> Mr. Crouse suggested that the criteria situation be looked into immediately in terms <br /> of handling it before all the funding was allocated, as this would create a different <br /> kind of problem. Mrs. Liljedahl felt that Mr. Locher should be asked to look into <br /> the legalities, and the fees would have to be put up to Council ; The Park Board would <br /> need the approval of the Council to pursue the matter in any case, as it concerned the <br /> City as a whole. Mr. Shaughnessy moved that the Council be furnished with whatever <br /> they needed in order to process the matter further, and that it be made a priority <br /> matter. Don Volk suggested this be amended to request that the Park Board be given <br /> the authority to do whatever necessary to investigate the matter. Mrs. Liljedahl felt <br /> the legal aspect should also be handled by Mr. Locher. Mr. Crouse felt that initially <br /> a letter requesting clarification of the criteria and its application should be sent, <br /> either by Mr. Locher or the Council . <br /> Mr. Scherer felt the grant should not be counted on, and that the Park Board should go <br /> ahead with the building. Mr. Crouse suggested that 30 days be taken to investigate <br /> the LAWCON matter, and if Metro' s position remained unchanged, the Board should make <br /> a decision on the building. Mrs. Liljedahl felt the issue with Metro did not only con- <br /> cern the building for Lino Park, but any future grants as well , and the criteria should <br /> be looked into and changed if possible. If action wasn't taken at this point, the City <br /> would not be in a position to pursue it later on. Mr. Shaughnessy repeated his motion <br /> to have the Council look into the matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Johnson. All <br /> were in favor. Motion declared passed. Mrs. Liljedahl noted that any of the Park <br /> Board members could be contacted concerning this, and felt it should be handled as soon <br /> as possible. <br /> Mr. Shaughnessy had received a call in reference to the shed on the park property where <br /> the house had been comdemned, as to whether it could be removed to the new residence; <br /> he had referred them to Mr. Zelinka. Don Volk noted that the shed was well-built and <br /> in good condition, and had been used for storage. Mr. Shaughnessy asked if moving the <br /> shed would require a permit. <br /> Mrs. Liljedahl had also received a call about one of the parks being locked up; Don <br /> Volk indicated that they had probably been referring to the driveway gate, which was <br /> always locked as it was for City us.e only. <br /> Mr. Shaughnessy raised a question as to the piece of park land indicated on the map <br /> for East Birch. Addition, and asked what the reasons had been for choosing that parti- <br /> cular piece, as. it was located near the Centerville boundary, which was commercial <br /> property. He had thought a different piece had been chosen. The July 2 minutes were <br /> consulted on this and Don Volk indicated it had been discussed as a playground/tot lot <br /> type of thing for children. Mr. Shaughnessy noted that there was a 5-acre park in <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.