Laserfiche WebLink
Case #2 <br /> <br />STRATEGY FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT <br />by: Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator and <br />Mark Boos, Parks/Utilities Coordinator <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />Early in '~1989 the City of Ramsey adopted Ordinance #89-17 amending the Subdivision <br />portiorr Of the City Code. This amendment resulted in Chapter 9, Section 9.50 entitled, <br />"Park an~t OPen Space Dedication". This remains the existing criteria for determining <br />minim~ park dedication requirements. The Park and Recreation Commission intends to <br />review~arkidedication each year in order to assure that the dedication is meeting the <br />intendeitfpu~ose. The annual review will primarily deal with the cash or percentage rates <br />of parg/liedl, cation in order to propose any modifications of rates to City Council for <br />considerfition before Council's annual rate determination resolution. <br /> <br />While th{~ park dedication rates may need periodic revision in order to remain competitive <br />with infl~ttion and our peer communities, the purpose portion should be perennial. <br /> <br />The fmicfion~of this case is to examine park and open space dedication to determine if what <br />is contai~nedlwithin it addresses the presumed needs of the City. City Staff is currently <br />review!rig the subdivision requirements including park dedication. Staff poses the <br />followiia~ questions to assist in examining the effectiveness of the subdivision ordinance: <br /> <br />When should neighborhood parks be developed? <br /> <br />Ao <br /> <br />Concurrent with subdivision development (Stage I) <br />Through time as dollars somehow become otherwise available [read as <br />"probably not in our lifetime"] <br />In some fixed priority fashion with the goal of development and then <br />redevelopment of "X" number of parks/trails each year <br />At such time as Ramsey achieves a certain density <br />In one fell swoop with a bond issue if passed by the citizenry <br /> <br />If we cauyse development of neighborhood parks as a Stage I improvement, <br /> <br />Do we use all of the subdivision dedication dollars to whatever extent <br />available from the subdivision? <br />Do we levy extra assessments such as in Wood Pond Projects to whatever <br />extent necessary beyond dedication fees to ensure complete development? <br />Do we limit development in a more Spartan-like fashion to ensure dedication <br />fees are available for community park facilities? <br /> <br />What is the priority of various types of park development? <br /> <br />D. <br />E. <br />F. <br /> <br />Neighborhood in new subdivisions <br />Neighborhood in existing subdivisions <br />Trails between neighborhood parks <br />Trails to community parks from various types of land use <br />Community parks <br />Multi-jurisdictional [read county, school district or regional] parks <br /> <br /> <br />