Laserfiche WebLink
Chairman Hetland suggested having September's Park and Recreation meeting on Monday, <br />before the September 10th City Council meeting dealing with this issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Miller asked if there was an adjoining trail easement dedicated at the time of the platting of the <br />Stanhope development. <br /> <br />City Staff and the Commissioners were unclear if this was the case. Mr. Miller said again that he <br />thought it was. <br /> <br />The consensus of the Commission was to table the park dedication recommendation until <br />September's meeting to allow time for determining if the City does have trail corridor easement on <br />the south side of Stanhope Addition and to also inspect the bluffline area for its trail suitability. <br /> <br />Case #2: Park Dedication for Minor Subdivisions <br /> <br />Mr. Gromberg explained that City Staff has found a section in the City Code that should be <br />reworked. The section applies to the way in which park dedication is calculated for minor <br />subdivision and that this ordinance addresses situations similar to the ones recently encountered <br />with Mr. Sibbel and Mr. Bauer. <br /> <br />Motion by Chairman Hetland and seconded by Commissioner Prall to accept the ordinance as <br />accepted. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairman Hetland, Commissioners Prall, Lokker and Swokowski. <br />Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioners Roselle, Johnson and Rustad. <br /> <br />Case #3: ~on,~ider Divestation of Lot 9, Block 2, Windsorwood Addition <br /> <br />Mr. Boos presented the background pertaining to Lot 9, Block 2, Windsorwood Addition and an <br />explanation to the Commission as to why they were being asked to determine if it should be <br />retained or sold. He described the property, the large amount of existing trail corridor already <br />connected to Lot 9 and the fact that it is high ground and a comer lot. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued as to the origin of the City property. <br /> <br />Daryl Richmond, 17623 Marmoset Street N.W., Ramsey - stated that the residents are in favor of <br />the sale of Lot 9 if retention of it increases the likelihood of an adjoining trail. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued as to ownership of the adjoining trail corridor to Lot 9. <br /> <br />Chairman Hetland explained that the developer may have recorded the City property as a utility <br />easement as opposed to park property. <br /> <br />Henry Florentius, 17601 Marmoset Street N.W., Ramsey - said that they (residents) have voiced <br />their opposition to a trail in that area before and felt that the City did not listen to the residents or at <br />least the change of elected and appointed officials caused difficulties. <br /> <br />Chairman Hetland reiterated that it is.difficult for the Commission to please each special interest <br />group. <br /> <br />Mr. Florentius stated that if there is no money and no immediate plans to develop it (trail system), <br />then take it off the map. <br /> <br />Jacki Florentius demanded that she know what the next step would be. <br /> <br />Mr. Boos suggested that Ms. Florentius be the spokesperson for the area residents and he would <br />contact her next week in regard to ownership of the trail corridor and then all would be a bit more <br /> <br />PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION / AUGUST 8, 1991 <br /> PAGE 3 OF 5 <br /> <br /> <br />