Laserfiche WebLink
]v'mmo to P~i: and Recr~uon Commission <br />Page 2 of 3 ,: <br /> <br />Contemplated, also in 1996, was development of a park a.menity adjacent to or surroundin~o <br />Sunfish Lak~. if 300 housing units are buih in thai area, the actuaJ revenues at today's rates will <br />be $210,000.. This, however, ma}' be a three or four phase development. Tbs ),ear 1996 seems <br />possible m this point as an initial project date. <br /> <br />in 1996 there,is contemplated a looping of the Itaska Trail to Cch=al Park. h seems, given our <br />recenl projects and our constraints on pla>,field availability, this projecl could be delayed in <br />deference to a more active use. <br /> <br />Park ded~catioi~ payments have been received into various districts. These revenues could be <br />pro~arnmed intO the 1995 project year or an5, yea- thereafter. <br /> <br />995 trnprox.,.~Oents <br /> <br />Except as suggested above, I don't believe significant changes in the 1995 pro~m~am are necessa.D/ <br />or appropnam. ~Trie itaska project will provide an active trail head for a project that will have been <br />under development for three years at that point, h also may have ballfield,/soccer components. <br />Fox Ridge is a t~roposM development in an area tm. ally void of significant park amenities. The <br />Greenland Hills trail is a paving concurrent with the 155rdYt55th MSA road projecL <br /> <br />Ye~' 2.0.00 <br /> <br />Given above corilments, I'd suggest that you consider delaying 1999 projects to the x, em- 2,000. <br />This wil] allow increased room in prior years for expenditure increases for projects shown in <br />bern, eon 1996 and 1998 currently. <br /> <br />Annual <br /> <br />Current development policy is to construct park improvements upon receipt of revenues into the <br />Park Trust ]:und from new subdivisions. Additionally, Council committed $120.000 ~o~ each of <br />loo~ 1994, and 1~'95 from the Lanck'ill Trust Fund interest earnings. The curreni CI_P shows this <br />allocation through 1996 with a reduction to $80,000 per annum thereafter. The difference in <br />funding was to be directed to a new Public Works facility. This expenditure will not occur in that <br />we are projecmd ~ purchase an existing faciiky for public works use on September 1, 199~. <br />While we confinug to have space problems in the P01ice.and Fire areas, this reallocation of <br />resources will be re~-examined. An}, thoughts on the subject are welcome. <br /> <br /> <br />