PRECA 06-03-1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES 2 May 4 , 1981 . . agencies that don't implement the objectives of the regional system as Ramsey County is doing. Jessen said this is clearly a policy matter and there are no legal problems involved in designating New Brighton as the implementing agency. Jessen said there are several ways to handle the situation. Three suggestions are on pages 2 and 3 of the staff memo. He said that there have been eases of implementing agencies (counties) refusing to acquire parks; however, this is the first time a county has refused a grant that `in the past they'd been pushing for. There is no specific recommendation before the Commission; staff would like Commission input on this item. Lynch asked if the joint master plan between New Brighton and Ramsey County has been completed. Jessen said no, we haven't been given a complete plan. This is because they. are having problems with the operation and maintenance question. Lynch also questioned if there has been any communication with Anoka County on the matter. Jessen said that officially there hasn't, although there have been staff-to-staff discussions. Maurice Anderson, Director of New Brighton Parks and Recreation, spoke before the Commission. He agreed with the contents of the report and felt that the issue had been clearly laid out to the Commission. He said that the land owners around the park are concerned with the amount of time it is taking for the park to be developed; there is pressure from local residents to turn the park into a Iocal park, not a regional one. However, he said the park board stands firm in their feeling that the park should become a regional facility. He said a concept plan for the site has been approved by the Ramsey County Board. Anderson said the portion of the park that the city owns'is the key element to the park. About 80-90$ of the development, according to the approved concept plan, occurs on the New Brighton portion of the land. Therefore, any operation and maintenance costs incurred from the Ramsey County side won't be very much. A lake surface use ordinance has also been approved. He said that they-are fully aware of the ramifications of their request.. They understand this will cost them money and that it will be their staff who will develop and implement the park plans. The New Brighton Council has expressed support through a formal resolution. He concluded that they need our help fairly rapidly. Svendsen pointed out that it was made clear in the policy plan that we wanted to reduce the number of implementing agencies. It's a dilemma for the Commission to encourage Eden Prairie to be bought out by HCPRD, and then turn around and approve New Brighton's request for implementing agency status. Bosanko asked if New Brighton, would contract with Ramsey County to operate the park. Anderson .stated that at a previous meeting between the Mayor and the City Council, one of the council members commented that New Brighton might end up paying all costs but being given none of the authority. They therefore felt they should have implementing agency status, although they'd be willing to look into any other counter proposals the Commission might come up with if that couldn't happen. Perovieh asked how much city money the New Brighton has invested in the park. Anderson answered they had approximately $650,000 invested. Perovieh said he understood New Brighton's position; however, designating them as an implementing agency would require an amendment to the Policy Plan. Perhaps, since Ramsey County does not want the park, Anoka County would be interested in becoming involved.