HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976 05-26 Tennis bonding discussed THE REVIEW •
Tennis ;;�
bonding
discussed
The possibility of bonding for tennis
courts, use of the Heritage Center, a
charge against undeveloped commercial
property for parks and other items were
discussed Monday,May 24,in a "shirt
sleeve"session of the Maplewood city
council and the city Parks and Recreation
Commission.
The session,held at Ostergren Farm,
now called Maplewood Heritage Center,
was open to the public.But it was em-
phasized that the session was merely a
discussion,and no decisions either for or
against any plans discussed were made.
Offical action on any of the items would
require a formal presentation to or
initiation by the city council,and then
council adoption of the proposal.
The possibility of bonding for con-
struction of tennis courts in the city was
discussed, possibly as a profit-making
project.It was noted that tennis is now
one of the nation's most popular sports
and that Maplewood's needs call for up to
30 tennis courts, according to figures
presented.The city now has four courts;
two each at West Hills and Four Seasons
parks.
Comments focused on the possibility of
locating four or more courts at Flicek
Park,and moving ball fields now there to
nearby Gloster Park.The courts could be
covered by a plastic dome and utilized
year-round,as in some other cities.
One city council member told the Park
Board"Propose it to us so we can accept
it.Tennis is the hottest thing that ever
came off the pike now."
The two bodies also talked about use of
Heritage Center. It was noted that a
number of civic groups use the facility for
meetings.A system of fee charges for use
of the facility is being developed.
The city council expressed approval of
present uses of the former Ostergren
Farm for collection of artifacts and as a
community center.
A commercial charge for parks was
also discussed,with many present noting
that residential land developers pay$317
for each new house constructed. Several
of the Park Board members suggested a
10 percent charge against commercial
land as it is developed, but the concept
met strong resistance from at least one
member of the city council.
He noted"Start out easy.Don't hit them
I% (commercial developers) too hard to
• start with."He explained the plan should
not"price Maplewood out of the market.
We don't want it to be so much they
(developers) say to hell with
Maplewood."
One Park Board member said he felt
that business also benefits from park land
and by having a business in a community
which provides good services.
State law specifies that any such
charges made on commercial property
must be based on the fair market value on
the undeveloped land.
Other items discussed at the meeting
included priorities for the time when the
city asks for a bond issue specifically for
parks. Those present indicated that land
acquisition would be a first priority,
followed by land development.
But several present expressed doubts
about the public reception to such an idea
at this time.
Bike trails were also discussed,and the
groups noted problems of maintenance
and maintenance costs, liability and
police problems in maintaining such
trails.However,most said they supported
the idea of trails, with one park board
member indicating "If we don't provide
trails for people to get to parks they'll just
walk through people's yards."
The park board indicated it would like
to at least review plans for developments
in the city to offer input regarding parks
and park land.
The city council indicated it would be
interested in a tour of parks in Maplewood
and in other cities sometime this summer.