01-20-81 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MEETING, JANUARY 20, 1981 —46 PARK PLAN: Councillor Morgan replied that the Park Commission has not acted on park acquisition for any of the proposed developments in that area, These will be considered when the plat development is further along. He said the Park Commission had recently reviewed park needs for Cimarron but felt there was adequate open space and recreation facilities available at Cimarron. The PAC also considered Cimarron's proximity to Oakland Jr. High, which has many facilities available. It was the opinion of the Park Commission that there was ample recreational facilities to serve Cimarron and nothing more was planned for Cimarron, at this time. The PAC will continue to evaluate the needs of this area. Fraser disagrees with the findings of the Park Commission and feels the Council should reconsider park acquisition for this area. Mottaz supported the PAC decision and stated there have been no complaints from Cimarron residents about inadequate recreation in the area. Cimarron has the same facilities as are provided in other City parks.. Fraser asked what the City plans to do in the future to meet the needs of Cimarron. Morgan said all future developments in that area will be reviewed and appropriate park .land will be acquired. Fraser would like the statement "neighborhood parks have been acquired near each developed residential area" reevaluated and discussed when the goals and policies of khe PAC is reviewed again. Mottaz moved, seconded by Morgan, to adopt the Park Plan, including the ( Goals and Policies section and the 5 Year Capital Plan; and, forward same to the Metropolitan Council as pars: of the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. Motion carried 4-1. Fraser opposed. C. Assessment Hearings — The Council. reviewed Engineer Bobrer's memo sum— marizing the Assessment Schedule. Fraser moved, seconded by Eder to accept the Assessment Formula for Surface Water Improvements completed in 1980, as recommended by the City Engineer (January 14 Memo). In discussion the Administrator explained the formula for the Little Sunfish Project. The Administrator will also verify that the two residents on Legion Pond who requested to be removed from the petition are not included on that assessment roster. Motion carried 5-0, emended Novak moved, seconded by Morgan,*tee#dsgtrR�A-aeept�rtrlshe-impxeuements 2/3/81 -end setting a public hearing on assessments for March 10, 19819 beginning at 7:30 p.m, at Lake Elmo Elementary School. Individual projects will be Stagg e.,ed throughout the evening. Motion carried 5-0. The Council agreed with the Engineer's recommendation that Paul Emerson should not be assessed for the Little Sunfish Improvement, as he gave the City more in timq equipment and service on the project than the assessment. The Administrator reported that the cost of his personal time was less than 10916 of each project; but the total staff time would exceed 10/. The Council agreed with the 10''/o computation.