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 <br />Page 4 <br />Schmidt commented that he felt the Council deleted that section <br />because we want to let them know in a tactful way we are tired <br />of waiting but do not want to burn any bridges in the process. <br />We want to continue meeting with Ramsey County to help keep the. <br />doors ..open. <br />Anderson wanted the Park Board to be aware of the fact that if <br />New Brighton would become implementing agency, we would also be <br />including the Rush Lake portion in the plan. A regional park must <br />have a certain amount of land and without the Rush Lake portion., we <br />would be short the amount of land required. <br />Gunderman asked if there is any Metro Council money available for <br />development. <br />Anderson said there is about $600,000 at this time. Additional <br />money is programmed in subsequent years, approximately one million. <br />dollars. <br />Johnson asked if Metro Council has ever been an implementing agency. <br />Staff replied no. <br />Johnson asked if it would be possible for the DNR to become an <br />implementing agency. <br />Staff said it is possible but a far shot. <br />Staff told the Park Board that if the City decides it would like to <br />be implementing agency, it would commit the City to preparing a <br />master plan but if the City could not agree on maintenance or the <br />plan broke down for whatever reason, the City could then call a halt. <br />If our City. Council. and Metro Council both agree on the master plan, <br />then the City is committed to maintain and operate the park. <br />Solberg asked if a City our size has ever been an implementing agency. <br />Staff said no. <br />Van Hatten asked if there are funds available from Metro Council for <br />planning. <br />Staff said yes for. design and engineering but not for preparation of <br />the master plan. <br />Van Hatten stated that if the City went through the planning process <br />and it was then decided we would not be the implementing .agency and <br />Ramsey County became the implementing agency, the planning the City <br />did would not be wasted <br />Gunderman inquired about the City developing the land on .its own. <br />Anderson stated the Council°s direction was to explore the possibility <br />of being an implementing agency and then explore doing it locally. <br />Grimshaw asked if we would have access to Metro development money <br />for Rush Lake. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.