My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02244
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2200
>
pf_02244
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 11:46:10 AM
Creation date
12/8/2004 10:54:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2244
Planning Files - Type
Rezoning
Address
725 LARPENTEUR AVE W
Applicant
HERITAGE DEV. OF MINNESOTA
Status
DENIED
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
130
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
<br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />TO: Members ~C~~V; l}..e" Park & <br />FROM: Jim Luge~ <br />DATE: August ") (/1 qq / <br /> <br />Recreation Commission <br /> <br />SUBJECT: Land dedication from Heritage Development of Minnesota, <br />Inc. <br /> <br />------~------~-~.~~-_._-----~~._&_--~~~~-y--~-_._~-_.&---_&_.~--- <br /> <br />I won't be able to attend the August 4, 1992 meeting to discuss the <br />land dedication or the tour following due to prior commitments. I <br />dc feel that the commission needs to consider carefully the offer <br />from Heritage Development of Minnesota, Inc. The following should <br />be considered when looking at this project: <br /> <br />1. Looking at the concept plan, a little over 50% of the site is <br />developed, the remainder to potentially be dedicated as <br />park/open space. This is somewhat misleading as most of the <br />remaining non-developed acreage is water or marsh covered. The <br />pohdage area should not be part of the 1.81 acre dedication as <br />it is already protected under the Protected Wetland Act. The <br />remainder of the area, given the potential fluctuation in <br />water level due to seasonal bounce, may and may not be usable. <br />Regardless, the amount of actual usa hie land for park seems to <br />be so minimal that it has little value to our park system. <br /> <br />2. The responsibility of maintaining a small unusable area that <br />adds additional fragmentation to our system is not desirable. <br /> <br />I want it to be recorded that I at this point am not in favor of <br />accepting land dedication, but would be in favor of cash in lieu of <br />land. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.