My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
02/01/1993 Park Board Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Park Board
>
Park Board Meeting Packets
>
1990 - 1998 Park Board Packets
>
1993 Park Board Packets
>
02/01/1993 Park Board Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2021 1:10:07 PM
Creation date
6/18/2021 1:46:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Park Board
Park Bd Document Type
Park Board Packet
Meeting Date
02/01/1993
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.
/
62
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
r- <br /> location on the lake-side of the homes. The budget was prepared <br /> with the exact overall scope of the project laid out. Please see <br /> the attachment. This budget was given to the developer. <br /> The developers spokesman, Mr. Roger Kolstad presented to the <br /> December park board an entirely different view of their <br /> willingness to follow through with the agreed-upon plan of action. <br /> Again, please remember that the engineering, trail design and <br /> layout, and permit process should have been done as part of the <br /> platting process. It was also well known what we wanted at the <br /> initial stages of the platting processes. After a much conflicting <br /> discussion it was agreed to follow the staff recommendations with <br /> a few changes. Please refer to the park board minutes. One change <br /> that we disagree with is one of the developer assuming <br /> responsibility for permit application with staff review. It is <br /> felt that at this time it is not in the best interest of the city <br /> to disregard our design and quality control program as set forth in <br /> the Brauer proposal. In order to present a quality permit to the <br /> Corps of Engineers, all of the elements as projected in the scope <br /> of work need to be considered. The developer must understand that <br /> any review that is done by staff will also be billed to the <br /> development at our established rates. Since we are not experts in <br /> soils engineering and landscape architecture, anything that we <br /> review will be referred to Brauer and Associates. As with any of <br /> the problems associated with development standards, design and <br /> layout in city projects, we have a review process set up by experts <br /> representing our interests. Brauer and Associates are our chosen <br /> parks and recreation representatives. <br /> The issue has also been complicated by the fact that Mr. Kolstad <br /> has assumed a spokesman responsibility with this development and <br /> potential home buyers were brought to the park board meeting. A <br /> city concern is that of a realestate agent working for the <br /> developer may make an inappropriate guarantee to people with <br /> purchase options on the properties that border the trail effected <br /> areas. Since the city council has already acted on the final plat <br /> approval, any recommendations by the park board that address the <br /> trail issue are hypothetical at this point and the people involved <br /> in the purchase of these lots should understand this. <br /> Our recommendation as staff is to pursue the preferred trail <br /> location on the lake-side of the homes with the options as set <br /> forth in the staff report to the park board with the modified <br /> concerns of the board as per?� the park board minutes. Our <br /> recommendation includes the services of our parks and recreation <br /> consultants, Brauer and Associates to provide the design and <br /> quality control necessary so that the best interests of the city <br /> are served. <br /> r <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.