PRECM 01-06-1971 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3 ..Park Board January 6, 1 J Brauer and Associates Proposal The proposal from Brauer and Associates for a Park System Analysis by their firm was explained to the Board. The analysis is designed to evaluate the existing system and recommend a plan for future growth. The basic consideration in determining whether or not to recommend acceptance of the proposal was local control vs. professional expertise. If the Board were to attempt the analysis itself, it could use the approach it desired and mold the plan specifically to the needs of New Brighton. If Brauer and Associates were to undertake the analysis, they would provide an expertise and experience within their firm"not available within the Park Board. The cost of the basic services was quoted at $3,000.00 Gunderman stated he favored retaining the planner to insure accountability and provide professional expertise. Hagemeyer agreed and further stated that the money spent on the planner would be made up for in time saved. Smith proposed that the analysis could be modified to better fit New Brighton's needs if the Board so desired. Hagemeyer added that a professional planner provides necessary direction. Sherlock felt that objectivity was required and an outsider could provide this. Weissman moved that the Park Board recommend to the Council that Brauer and Associates be retained to conduct a park system analysis in accordance with the terms of the submitted proposal. Dahl seconded the motion. Motion carried Zoning and Platting Ordinances Review In response to the Board's previous request, the Department reviewed the Platting and Zoning Ordinances to determine the feasibility of: I. Instituting a park land dedication provision in the Platting Ordinance for developers. 2. Insuring that developers provide adequate recreation space for residents in multiple dwelling projects. The present platting ordinance contains no provision for any park dedication. A proposed platting ordinance under discussion requires that action on any plat including land designated as a proposed park be deferred for 90 days so that acquisition can be considered if the land is not dedicated by the developer. Extending the dedication provisions would create some problems. Instituting the share buying concept as suggested would, on the basis of $10,000 in principal paid off of the total capital investment and spread over 5,596 residences, result in a per residence fee of $1.78 required of all new developments. The fee is small and is not likely to grow as the number of residences will increase at the same time the paid-up principal increases. The fact that the bond issue payment schedule is so structured that pay- ments due increase as the Village grows provides the same benefit as share buying. The other alternative is to require developers to contribute a certain percentage of land or its equivalent value in money. However, this would likely result in the Park and Recreation