My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10/05/1992 Park Board Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Park Board
>
Park Board Meeting Packets
>
1990 - 1998 Park Board Packets
>
1992 Park Board Packets
>
10/05/1992 Park Board Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2021 3:44:03 PM
Creation date
6/18/2021 10:31:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Park Board
Park Bd Document Type
Park Board Packet
Meeting Date
10/05/1992
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.
/
79
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
n 8-Implementation Ptah My of Lino Lakes <br /> e 82(Fait 1 of 2). General Frmd ings and for Park Land AcguisiOion and Devdopma t <br />)rthcoming text summaries the Advisory Committee's general findings and Acquisition of linear trail eomdors/easements rights should be undertaken <br /> unendations for park land acquisition and development.They are based on prior to (optimal) or coincide with the development of the surrounding <br /> perceptions and understanding as to the City of Lino Lakees current parks area The location of the corridors should be based on the parameters as <br /> creational needs and desires. set forth in this document and in accordance with city ordinance. <br /> qgs and Reconunendations for Park Land Aogagc Findings and Recamme for Park Land Devrl <br />.n general, acquiring land for individual neighhborhood parka should be Since the overriding objective is to provide quality recreational opportunities <br /> undertaken prior to(if feasible) or coincide with the development of the for curma residents, the development of the parks that are in close <br /> airrounding area.The parcel should be selected on the basis of its quality proximity to established or developing neighborhoods were cited to be the <br />'or park purposes and location within the service area.Actual site selection top priorities.To this end,each existing park should be developed to a level <br /> should be based on the parameters as set forth in the individual park plates. that is consistent with their development program (as defined in the <br /> ro the extent possible,acquisition of land for neighborhood parks should individual park plates). Given current finding limitations, it should be <br />)e accomplished through park dedication. expected that each park's development will likely occur over a number of <br /> phases-unless,of course,alternative funding sources can be secured(such <br />►fore specifically,acquiring land for neighborhood parks NA N I% M 2, as a park bond referendum and state grants).The priority rankings as listed <br /> 414 is considered a high priority since the land surrounding them has reflect the Advisory Committee's perception as to the relative order in <br /> zither already been developed or is near the development stage.At this which individual park improvement initiatives should be undertakm i! <br /> ime,it is anticipated that N-8 would be acquired through a long-term lease <br /> Ath the State.N 12&M 2 will likely be acquired through park dedication. An important note with respect to development priority rankings as set <br />►nd N-14 will likely have to be acquired through direct purchase. forth in this document is that they are not intended to dictate the use of <br /> the Park Department's parks maintenance budget.Dealing effectively with <br /> squiring land for A 1(the athletic complex near city hall)should ideally the general day-today maintenance concerns that arise through normal use <br />;cur in Phase I (1992-1995) to avoid inflated land values.The land will of the facilities should naturally take precedence over the development <br /> cely have to be acquired through direct purchase, priorities listed here.Additionally,small or individual development projects <br /> that improve the usability of any given park should,at the discretion of the <br /> Ithough land for A 3(athletic complex)will not be needed in the short Park Board and staff; take precedence over the development priorities <br /> rm,its long-term importance to the park system warrants its acquisition listed here.As an example, improving the warming house and adding a <br /> fore the opportunity is missed meaning being lost to other development skating rink at N 5 Lino Park are justifiable short-term projects since they <br /> the escalation of land values. To this end, the city should undertake would significantly improve the useability of the park - even though the <br /> gotiations with the current land owner during Phase I (1992-1995) to park is actually fairly low on the development priority list(#21). <br /> :ermine if some type of purchase arrangement-such as a time purchase <br /> h life estate-can be arranged. The first community-wide park development concern is C-1(Country Lakes <br /> Park). based on funding limitati Again dmg ors, amulti-phase approach will <br /> hough acquiring land for parks in a timely fashion is vital to the success likely be necessary: with the first phase concentrating on improving the <br /> he park system,it is also considered important to strive for a balance existing facilities,such as the beach,picnic areas,trails,parking,restrooms, / <br /> Neen acquisition and development initiatives.In other words,acquiring etc.Providing for the needs of disabled and handicapped users was cited as <br /> I for future parks should not be accomplished entirely at the expense of an important concern which should be addressed in the first phase of <br /> riding facilities for those that already reside in the city. development. <br /> rr <br /> 8-S ( 1 <br /> t <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.