My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
07/10/1985 Council Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1985
>
07/10/1985 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/14/2014 12:40:52 PM
Creation date
10/13/2014 3:14:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
07/10/1985
Council Meeting Type
Joint
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
052 , <br />SPECIAL JOINT 'iEL i'IN' <br />July 10, 1985 <br />Page Three <br />Mr. McLean explained the Planning and Zoning Board is concerned <br />that the Park Board has not designated land for park dedication <br />in the recent past, and has opted to receive money for park use. <br />Particularly, in the eastern portion of the City, where the P 5 <br />Z feels development is beginning to happen, there is no desig- <br />nated land for park or public use. The current comprehensive land <br />use plan calls for future park /public land in that area of the <br />City. Recently, several land splits, etc. have taken place in the <br />area, and the P 8 Z feels that the time to plan for park /public <br />land is.now. When the Park Board reviewed these land splits, etc. <br />they chose to take money rather than land. <br />Ken Johnson stated he was aware of the future need, but presently <br />he felt that land is planned for agriculture use. <br />Ray Johnson stated that he felt that the City presently has sev- <br />eral small undeveloped sites dedicated for park use. The City <br />does not have the money to develop the sites and to maintain the <br />sites is expensive. He felt that designating any further such <br />sites would be a further financial drain. He felt that 10% of <br />small land splits is not enough for a decent park and too much <br />of a burden on small individual land owners who wish to split. <br />He felt that the new park dedication policy which spells out <br />$160 per housing unit is more equitable for the small individual <br />land owner. <br />It was mentioned that the land could be bought now quite inex- <br />pensively because it is agricultural with no improvements, so <br />buying it now would be a wise financial move. A suggestion was <br />made to sell the small undeveloped sites within the City to pay <br />for a decent park. The group was reminded, however, that once <br />land is dedicated for park purposes, the City cannot legally sell <br />it. <br />• <br />Mayor Benson suggested that since the Park Board has now become <br />aware of the concerns of the Planning and Zoning Board, that they <br />take the next step in the direction of reserving a particular <br />spot for park or public use in the eastern portion of the City. <br />COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN <br />Mr. McLean explained that the P 8 Z Board feels that the compre- <br />hensive plan should be reviewed and the proper steps taken to <br />update the plan and related ordinance with regard to thoroughfare <br />patterns, possible rezoning of portions of the City, dish antennaes, <br />earth homes, solar heat, and future park and public use land. <br />Mr. Schumacher reminded the group that ordinance changes relating <br />to earth homes, dish antennaes, solar heat, etc. could be taken <br />care of quite inexpensively. Comprehensive plan reviews for <br />thoroughfares, rezones, etc. would require the expertise of a <br />professional planner. Currently the budget has no allocation <br />for these services. Mr. Zack Johnson has stated that it would <br />cost from $4,000 to $6,000 to do such comprehensive plan review, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.