My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
04/01/1991 Park Board Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Park Board
>
Park Board Meeting Packets
>
1991 Park Board Packets
>
04/01/1991 Park Board Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2021 9:58:51 AM
Creation date
7/23/2021 3:11:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Park Board
Park Bd Document Type
Park Board Packet
Meeting Date
04/01/1991
Park Bd Meeting Type
Regular
Park Bd Publication Type
Other
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 11, 1991 <br />1-04 <br />dedication money is needed to keep up with the increased costs of <br />land prices. The Park Board investigated several option in <br />obtaining the need money. A joint Park Board/DRB meeting was <br />held February 4, 1991 to discuss this matter and they are <br />recommending to Council that the park dedication formula remain <br />the same with the price per dwelling unit being increased to a <br />minimum of $600.00. Mr. Volk explained that 17 suburban cities <br />were surveyed during the investigation. Twelve cities have <br />higher fees than Lino Lakes and five (5) have lower fees. Some <br />of those cities are considering increasing their current fees. <br />Council Member Kuether asked Mr. Volk to survey surrounding <br />cities to see what their park dedication fees are. Council <br />Member Neal felt that cities that have more parks charge higher <br />fees. Mr. Volk explained that this city is seeing a lot of <br />developers who want to give park money in lieu of park land as <br />their park dedication. That usually indicated that the park fee <br />has not keep up to land values. <br />Council Member Reinert noted that the Council will have the <br />opportunity to look at this matter again during the second <br />reading of the ordinance amendment and moved to approve the first <br />reading of Ordinance No. 05 - 91 and dispense with the reading. <br />A"4N Council Member Neal seconded the motion. The matter of when the <br />new ordinance should take effect was discussed. Mr. Schumacher <br />suggested that the deadline should coincide with the submission <br />of the preliminary plat. Mr. Volk was asked to prepare a <br />proposal on this matter and present it to the Council at the time <br />of the second reading of the ordinance amendment. <br />Council Member Kuether suggested that the increase in park <br />dedication fee be phased in over a certain period of time. Mr. <br />Schumacher explained that this could be considered at the time of <br />the second reading. <br />Voting on the motion, motion carried unanimously. <br />Ordinance No. 05 - 91 can be found at the end of these minutes. <br />Consideration of Establishing a Comprehensive Park Plan Committee <br />- Mr. Volk explained that the staff was directed to form a <br />committee to begin the process of establishing a Comprehensive <br />Park Plan. A list of suggested members was given to the Council. <br />Mayor Bisel asked that Council members also sit in on the <br />meetings of this committee from time to time. He felt this was <br />an important issue. <br />Council Member Kuether moved to establish a committee as <br />recommended by Mr. Volk. Council Member Neal seconded the <br />^ motion. Voting on the motion, motion carried unanimously. <br />PAGE 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.