My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PRECM 03-03-1981
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
Parks And Recreation
>
Minutes Park & Recreation Commission Meetings P&R 01200
>
MINUTES
>
1981
>
PRECM 03-03-1981
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/29/2007 4:08:10 AM
Creation date
3/15/2007 12:00:22 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
March 3, 1981 Park Board .Minutes Page 2 <br />V. New Business <br />A. Comprehensive Plan Consistency Review (Wallburn Industrial Park) <br />Joan Archer, City .Planner, was present to review the Comprehensive <br />Plan Consistency of the proposal. <br />Schmidt added that the Council felt that this is crucial to the <br />Long Lake Park development. There is not alot-that can be done <br />at this time but the Council wants to know the Park Board concerns <br />and sensitivities regarding Long Lake Park. <br />The area being discussed is now zoned a sensitive industrial district. <br />The proposed revised zoning code includes the regulations for the <br />sensitive industrial district. The district restricts outside <br />storage, traffic, etc. The reason for .this .special process is be- <br />cause we have no such district now. <br />Grimshaw asked what will be necessary if the road would be extended <br />at a later date for access to the park. <br />Archer felt it would be a good idea to know this right now - at <br />least consider an easement. <br />Schmidt said that if the. City develops it as a City park, it is <br />possible the property could be developed as a PUD and they would <br />be responsible for the road. <br />Van Hatten said he was unsure whether he wants an industrial road <br />as an entrance to the park, unless there was a second road. <br />Gunderman stated we may not have a choice if Ramsey County doesn't <br />provide with access. <br />Van Hatten said. that even if Ramsey County doesn't provide access, <br />wouldn't we want a second road. <br />Anderson said it may be the only way into the park.. This. way is <br />better than no way. <br />Archer commented that there are restrictions on front yards, they <br />have to be landscaped, etc.... <br />Gunderman-asked each member to comment. <br />Carlson said it looks like an alternative .if nothing else. It is <br />some kind of road even if we have to go through an industrial area. <br />Dahl feels it is valuable in terms. of access. It is most crucial <br />that we are able.. to keep on top of it. <br />Grimshaw agreed with Dahl that it is important to .keep informed. <br />Felt the road was not the best for access but at least we would <br />have one, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.