My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
06/04/1990 Park Board Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Park Board
>
Park Board Meeting Packets
>
1990 - 1998 Park Board Packets
>
1990 Park Board Packets
>
06/04/1990 Park Board Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2021 3:03:01 PM
Creation date
6/11/2021 1:03:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Park Board
Park Bd Document Type
Park Board Packet
Meeting Date
06/04/1990
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.
/
116
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
RECOMMENDATION TO: CITY COUNCIL OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS - PAGE 6 <br /> FROM: PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 1989 <br /> SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE SECTION 510. 09 , SUBD.9 , <br /> PARR DEDICATION <br /> Mr. Larson commented that there -appears to be no dispute with the <br /> changes recommended by the Parks Commission; the question is whether <br /> to include any of the Chamber's recommendations . <br /> MOTION by Tatone, seconded by Sherwood, recommending to City Council <br /> Y approval of Amendments to City Code Section 510 . 09, Subdivision 9, <br /> as recommended by the Parks Commission. <br /> : Mr. Fitch noted that he strongly favors one suggestion_ made- by the <br /> Chamber. He stated that he believes there is the potential for <br /> a justification of park dedication credits in excess of 25% . He <br /> ' _ believes this should be recognized in the ordinance. <br /> Mr. Sherwood agreed. <br /> Mr. Tatone stated that at present there is no evidence to suggest <br /> 10"N that a credit of more than 25% is appropriate. He noted that this <br /> issue could be presented and considered as an additional amendment <br /> to City Code at a later date. <br /> Mr. Schmidt concurred with Mr. Tatone. <br /> Mr. Stiffler expressed a concern regarding collection of park <br /> dedication fees; he commented that it does not seem appropriate to <br /> "favor" large business over small business by requiring fees at time <br /> of plat. <br /> MOTION-CARRIED - (5-3) Nay: Stiffler, Mueller, Fitch <br /> CITY COUNCIL REVIEW DATE - DECEMBER 11 1989 <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS <br /> Ir6uise A. H nz ecord' g Clerk <br /> �'q <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.