Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />• <br />Park Board Meeting - March 5, 2001 <br />Minutes <br />Mr. Schmidt replied the signage issues have not yet been <br />addressed. The whole plan has been designed to eliminate the <br />accesses on Main Street. <br />Rick stated he will pass along the Park Board's concerns to the <br />City Engineer relating to crossing Arlo Lane. <br />Mr. Schmidt stated there will be an easement across the lot to <br />get to Outlot A. The City intends to black top the easement. <br />There will also be a four way stop at Marilyn. There are trails <br />in the First Addition through the ponds. <br />Chair Lindy stated it would be nice to review the project ahead <br />of time to address all concerns. Rick advised all City Boards <br />will review the plan during the preliminary plat process. <br />Pat stated anything that can be done to enhance the park area and <br />size is a good idea. <br />Paul stated his concerns relate to trail connections, park size, <br />and Outlot B, which are outside the developer's responsibility. <br />REVIEW PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION STUDY: <br />Rick referred to an updated draft copy of the Park and Trail <br />Study conducted by Northwest Associated Consultants Inc. He <br />noted there were some changes since the preliminary draft was <br />sent out to Park Board members earlier this month. <br />Rick asked for comments from Park Board members noting that the <br />City Council will be discussing this topic within the next few <br />months. He briefly reviewed the recommendations outlined in the <br />report. <br />Paul stated he does not agree with the recommendation regarding <br />commercial /industrial park dedication fees. He stated the City <br />needs to be very cautious about dropping those fees. The City <br />needs to be increasing park dedication fees. <br />Pat asked about the City's feeling regarding cash contributions <br />being made at the time of the final plat. Rick advised that <br />option does make sense because it takes into account the profit <br />being made from the land. It would be beneficial to the City and <br />the law does support that type of dedication. <br />Pat asked if there has been any experience regarding the per unit <br />charge. He expressed concern relating to developers questioning <br />or negotiating that type of park dedication fee. <br />3 <br />