Loading...
1978-02-23 Parks and Rec Comm Agenda PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Parks and Recreation Commission AGENDA February 23, 1978 8:00 P.M. 1. Approval of minutes. 2. Election of officers. 3. Recreation. 4. Commission letter to Mayor and Council. 5. Development Fund Balance ($52,592). 6. Possible Projects: a. Marie Park hockey & skating rinks. b. Lights for tennis courts. c. Mend -Eagan Capitol Improvements. d. St. Thomas Capitol Improvements e. Burrows property. 4 i CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Parks and Recreation Commission AGENDA February 23, 1978 8:00 P.M. 1. Approval of minutes. 2. Election of officers. 3. Recreation. 4. Commission letter to Mayor and Council. 5. Development Fund Balance ($52,592). 6. Possible Projects: a. Marie Park hockey & skating rinks. b. Lights for tennis courts. c. Mend -Eagan Capitol Improvements. d. St. Thomas Capitol Improvements e. Burrows property. REcrIVtrt January 31, 19 7 s JAN 31 1978 To: Mayon Bob Lockwood, City Councit Membeu . Fon many mond the Pattiz and Reetceat%on Commi,6,s ion has been btuui to ted ,in its attempt to eatvc y out what we 6 et.t wetce o un reps po6 ib.c P.Lti.ez . It was the unanimous decision o� the commission to retate oute eoneern6 to you. The duties and powetu -,, b ecti.on o6 Ordinance #109 ditceets the PoAk and Reetceation Commiszion to advize the city eouncit on mattete6 petrtaining to pariz and recAeationat deveeopment ptr.o- gtcamJ ..... The Commission zhatt, in pet 6otrmi,ng the a6orementi.oned duties and tce,spons,ibitities, exhibit the .in.iative .in �otunutati.ng poticaiets which wit . be teespons ive to the anticipated need and objeetiva o6 the community. We have been particuQ.an y 6tcustAated .in tcecent weeks with the handt%ng o6 the Rotting Green deveeopment. The City Admin- ,usttcator did mention tseveAae months ago that something wa's going to deve.bop .in the atcea. The next we heard was a 'bust ptuent- ation' to the Planning Commission with the comment that as there was atAeady a po k .in the area, cash wouf-d be aeeeptabte. At no time did the Park Comm -i sz ion have an oppoAtunity to took at the plan. And, we have been greasy concerned with that paAti.cutatt area which is devetop.ing rap,idP-y and cannot be adequatety seAved by the ma.niatune Matui.e Park. We voiced outs concerns to the Ptanni.ng Comm,izzion but in 6aiAness to the devetopeuus we eoutd not jump .in and demand pa)tk tand when they had a.etceady been advised to make a 6.inanciat conttubuti.on. FinaU y, Ordinance #109 instructs ups to cooperate with city petusonnee ,in .imp.2ementing the Park and ReetLeation Program. We wet.come each oppotctun.ity and hope that city petctonnet w.iU, .in turn, cooperate with us. cc: Howard Dahtgren Kathy Ridder S.inceAeey, Liz Witt, Patcf2 ChaiAman JeAAy Finn, Patcfz Vice-chaii man Gary Gulsta4,son, Park Secretary Mary M M , Jetvcy Lundeen GeA&y Mutcphy MEMO City of Mendota Heights February 23, 1978 To: Liz Witt From: Orvil Johnson, City Administrator Subj: Park & Rec Discussion - February 22, 1978 This will confirm a discussion of Park & Rec matters between you as Park & Recreation Chairman, Kathy Swanson as City Clerk, and myself as City Administrator, where in we discussed a number of matters. The meeting was somewhat in response to your letter of January 31 addressed to Mayor Lockwood and the City Council members, the in- tention being to more clearly establish one, communication on plan- ning matters and also clarification of other park and recreation matters. Briefly, the several topics discussed were: 1. Possible capital improvement projects being dis- cussed by the Park & Recreation Commission. 2. Possible cooperation with Henry Sibley High School and St. Thomas Academy on playground improvements. 3. Methods of improving communication between developers, the Planning Commission, and the Park and Recreation committee. 4. Recent developments on the grant applications. It appeared that the several capital improvement projects suggested by you should be investigated more thoroughly, cost estimates pre- pared and then some type of proposal for City Council consideration. Much of our time was spent discussing how to improve the communication lines and information flow between developers, the Planning Commission, the City staff and your Commission members. After some discussion I believe we agreed on this type of a proposal: 1. Your Commission will meet on the 4th Tuesday of every month, which is the same night that the Planning Com- mission meets. You'll attempt to appear either as a body or some deldgates from your body to the Planning Commission meeting to discuss the appropriate all �'� f matters. Your group would be meeting in the conference room on the 2nd floor, and the Planning Commission would be meeting in the Council Chambers. 2. On Subdivision Applications there's always a thirty (30) day waiting period between the time the Planning Com- mission discusses the proposal in a preliminary form and the time when a formal hearing is held. You as Planning Commission Chairperson will receive the appro- priate data (plans, reports, and other supporting data) at the same time the Planning Commission members. This will enable you to discuss intelligently any park and recreation matters at the preliminary discussion meetings. If you need additional input you can expect to request an appearance via the petitioner or developer sometime in the thirty (30) day period. 3. The Park & Recreation Commission will furnish a written report to City offices timely, so that it may be sub- mitted to the Planning Commission with their agenda on the Thursday before the 4th Tuesday. This will be your report concerning any park or recreational matters on the petition and of course, you also would be invited to attend that hearing to elaborate on the written re- port. 4. The subject development will be explained to some staff member prior to meeting time so that you and your com- mission members may have the benefit of an explaination from City Staff. At the present time we are thinking about asking Rudy Literski to bring this information to your meeting, allowing you to more intelligently dis- cuss the proposal and react accordingly. As an initial step towards this, Rudy will be somewhat informed on the several plats to be discussed on February 23, You will please review the Friendly Hills replat and also the Delaware Hills preliminary plat. The City Council specifically asked for your comments on the Friendly Hills plat, and also I expect a response to the proposed $500 park contribution per lot on the Delaware Hills subdivision. As to recent grant application developments, I advised you that a Jane Pinchot of Metro Council advised me on the 22nd that our chances of obtaining a $95,000 grant on the Lexington Avenue/Wagon Wheel Trail is very very good. Metro Council staff members were making their recommendation to a council subcommittee on the 22nd and she had every reason to believe that the recommendations would be accepted. If certain "Interstate" financing was not available she was confident that other Metro Council funds would be used to provide grant monies for this particular trail application. As you recall this received very high priority because it was consistent with tFaI] plan, and the overall Metro- politan development Regards, Orvil J. Johnson City Administrator OJJ/rmd