My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 05/13/2004
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Parks and Recreation Commission
>
2004
>
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 05/13/2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/27/2025 9:49:51 AM
Creation date
5/10/2004 11:33:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Parks and Recreation Commission
Document Date
05/13/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
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
Chairperson Johns responded she did not want the estimates to show significantly lower amounts <br />than what would be needed. <br /> <br />Chairperson Johns noted she noticed differences in lengths when reviewing the digital <br />photography. <br /> <br />Parks and Utilities Supervisor Riverblood responded that would be corrected. <br /> <br />Commissioner Shryock indicated some of the sentences discussing the proposed trails contained <br />text that made it sound as if the trails already existed. She asked that staff review the wording <br />when the section was reworked. <br /> <br />Parks and Utilities Supervisor Riverblood responded he had not reviewed this section and <br />suspected the entire section would be rewritten. Also, the mapping was not complete and the <br />routing of trails C°uld change as the layout of the land was better understood and there were <br />changes in land use. Reasonable consistency with open space was also considered, as the trails <br />should be close to the greenways, which could also change the alignment of the trails. <br /> <br />Chairperson Johns noted indication was given that alignment was not identified or specific. She <br />thought "we were going to try to identify some of that stuff." <br /> <br />Principal City Engineer Olson responded the same type of language was used in the sewer and <br />water plans; therefore, if a reason surfaced to change proposed plans, more flexibility was <br />available. <br /> <br />Case#5: Recommend Park Dedication for Elliott Schaeffer/Trott Brook Minor <br /> Subdivision <br /> <br />Civil Engineer II Linton explained that Elliott Schaeffer was requesting preliminary approval to <br />replat one homestead to create a second buildable lot. The City had the option of cash, land or a <br />combination of cash and land for park dedication. The City's 2004 park dedication fee was <br />$2,200 per residential lot; existing homesteads were exempt fi.om park dedication fees. The plat <br />would be subject to the park dedication rate in effect at the time of final plat approval. Park <br />dedication fees must be paid pr/or to the City releasing the plat for recording at Anoka County. <br /> <br />Civil Engineer 1I Linton explained that the City had established a trail development fee at a rate <br />of $550 per unit; existing homesteads were exempt from this fee. The plat would be subject to <br />the trail fee in effect at the time of final plat approval. This fee must be paid prior to the City <br />releasing the mylars for recording. <br /> <br />Civil Engineer II Linton noted that this tract was biSected by Trottbrook. He stated staff <br />contacted the applicant to explore the option of reserving a trail corridor along the creek to <br />connect with existing parks. <br /> <br />Civil Engineer 1/ Linton stated staff recommended the Commission accept park dedication of <br />$2,200 and trail dedication of $550 or motion to accept dedication of land adjacent to Trottbrook <br /> <br />Park and Recreation Commission/April 8, 2004 <br /> Page 12 of 21 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.