My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PRECM 08-13-1980
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
Parks And Recreation
>
Minutes Park & Recreation Commission Meetings P&R 01200
>
MINUTES
>
1980
>
PRECM 08-13-1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/29/2007 3:53:17 AM
Creation date
3/16/2007 7:51:24 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
August 13, 1980 Park Board Minutes Page.5 <br />Van Hatten amens~.dd'...last month's motion (to accept plan A~ <br />stating the possibility of a dual entrance feature should <br />not be excluded from the design considerations. Johnson <br />seconded.' <br />Van Hatten feels we should still be able to consider the <br />dual entrance. <br />Dahl stated the dual entrance has been considered previously and <br />the feeling was not to have a dual entrance. <br />Van Hatten stated it doesn't affect Sioux Blvd. residents. <br />Dahl felt. it would. People may leave from the parking lot <br />and use Sioux. <br />Gunderman stated if it`s going to be changed it`s-only fair that <br />we hold decision over another month and inform residents of the <br />changes. <br />Sylvester feels it's an atrocious traffic pattern.. <br />Anderson stated that the Park Board's roll is advisary to the <br />Council. When the plan goes to the Council all the discussion <br />will accompany it. He still recommends two entrances but the <br />Park. Board has made a decision and residents have added input. <br />He recommends that it. doesn't get restudied.. There is no new <br />data available. - <br />Johnson suggested.. letting it go as is and let it be known-the <br />difference of opinion of the Park Board members. <br />Dahl asked what will be gained by bringing it up again. What <br />purpose can be gained.. <br />Gunderman stated the credibility of the Park Board, <br />Olson stated she remembers Hansen Park entrance being discussed <br />about 1 year-ago and feels a decision should be made soon. <br />Van Hatten stated that since it is a split decision vote,. it <br />should go to the Co~incil without a recommendation. <br />Gunderman stated he doesn't see the Park Board plit.in anyway <br />just difference of opinions.. <br />Motion failed. Carlson, Dahl, Olson, Gunderman naye.; Van .Hatten <br />Hogan, Johnson aye <br />Motion by Carlson`,` seconded by .Dahl, to recommend- Plan A .from <br />last month. Motion failed. Van Hatten, Hogan, Johnson, <br />Gunderman naye, Carlson, Olson, Dahl aye <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.