|
Parks and Recreation
Commission Minutes
MARCH 2, 2010
PRESENT:
Etten, D. Holt, M. Holt, Lenz, Pederson, Ristow, Stark, Willmus
ABSENT:
Hiber, Jacobson
STAFF:
Brokke, Anfang, Evenson
1.
INTRODUCTIONS/ROLL CALL/PUBLIC COMMENT
No Public Comment
2.
COMMISSIONER RECOGNITION
Commission Chair Willmus
recognized departing Commissioner Sara Brodt Lenz for her years of service
and contributions to the Roseville Parks and Recreation Commission.
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES – FEBRUARY 9, 2010 MEETING
Commission Recommendation:
Minutes for the February 9, 2010 meeting
were
approved unanimously.
4.
PARK AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN LISTENING SESSION
Michael Schroeder from LHB and
Jeff Evenson, Parks Superintendent were present for this Commission Listening
Session. Schroeder spoke of the 10 Master Plan Listening Sessions that
have been conducted over the past 8 weeks. The Listening Sessions have
encouraged community engagement and were designed to provide an opportunity
for community members the opportunity to share their thoughts on Roseville
Parks, Recreation Facilities and Recreation Programs. Planning staff
have met with members of the City Council, four neighborhood sectors, the business
community, the arts, friends and athletics special interest groups.
Following the brief introduction, Michael encouraged Commissioners to share
their thoughts on the Parks and Recreation System.
§ Willmus
commented on gaps in the physical location of some parks and specifically in
regards to the geographic disparity in parks in the Southwest sector of the
City.
§ Lenz
talked of the current disconnect in the pathway system in relation to the
parks.
§ Pederson
recognized the good variety in neighborhood parks throughout the City and the
significant need for increased PIP funding to maintain and/or improve the
park resources we currently have in the system.
§ Etten
spoke to the fact that neighborhood parks tend to be more neglected than the
larger and more visible community parks due to limited resources.
Capital funding needs to be provided in order to keep up structures to
a high level.
§ Dave
Holt commented on the inconsistency in accessibility to park amenities.
§ Lenz
suggested that maybe some parks should be made into more open space if we
cannot afford to maintain play equipment.
§ Dave
Holt recognized the need for places for teenagers to gather and play.
§ Commissioners
spoke to the fact that our community parks are the shining stars in the City,
they are destination parks for community members and guests. We are
fortunate the local foundations and Friends organizations have embraced
Central Park and it would be nice if there were these same connections to our
neighborhood parks.
§ Lenz
suggested encouraging volunteers to participate in the Adopt-A-Park program
and recommended designing a system for single jobs, not necessarily long term
commitments.
§ Mary
Holt recommended using signage to promote volunteer opportunities.
Michael
Schroeder asked Commissioners to talk about the areas they see as challenges
for the department.
§ Commissioners
commented on the extensive list of environmental stewardship issues in the
parks;
o Forestry
and the diseased and hazardous tree program
§ No resources identified
to address this issue
§ A number of neighboring
communities have a full-time forester on staff to manage the forestry program
o Buckthorn
§ No resources identified
to address this issue
o Water
Run-Off
§ Dave
Holt sees the need to maintain “physical education” components for local
kids; practice facilities like fields and courts are needed to continue to
keep our kids active. There is also a need for indoor places to play.
§ Lenz
commented on the fact that she thought that sometime during her 6 year term
as a Commissioner there would be at least a plan for a community center …
§ Commissioners
around the table commented on the need for a centrally located community
center
o There
needs to be a way to hear from the people in regards to a community center;
if there are enough citizens who want a center and are willing to pay for it
there should be some action taken to make it happen.
o Mary
Holt commented on how it is a shame that in so many instances Roseville
schools are packing the students up on busses to go to the Shoreview or
Maplewood Community Center rather than being able to enjoy a facility at
home.
o Commissioners
mentioned that there is no notion of where a community center might be
located in the community, perhaps this type of vision would help move the
concept along.
§ Lenz
suggested looking into using random, empty retail space for community
programs.
§ There
are aesthetic issues in our park system;
o Access
to Langton Lake ball fields is awkward and inconvenient.
o Visibility
and access to a number of parks needs to be improved.
Michael
Schroeder asked which policy areas need to be addressed
§ Fiscal
policy with a consistent means for generating the needed revenues
§ Commercial
components need to play into the master plan
§ Parking
is challenging throughout the system
§ Address
tall structures in the parks
§ Explore
multiple uses in logical situations
5.
COMMUNICATIONS TOWER DISCUSSION
Staff talked
to Commission about the Council’s request for guidance in regards to;
placement, design, impacts and use of revenues.
§ Stark, Willmus and
Brokke met earlier to frame up talking points to begin the discussion.
§ Willmus reminded the
Commission that they initially took action that approved a single pole that
housed both lights for the hockey rink and the Clearwire tower needs.
o Willmus also
spoke of the need to establish a general policy that guides activity and
requests like this on park properties.
o Willmus
summarized the Commissions comments and discussion as shutting the door on
co-location in a park.
§ The Parks and Recreation
Commission recommends the following as it relates to towers in city parks:
o General
Conditions for Policy on Towers in City Parks:
·
Shall
be considered on a case by case basis and must be consistent with the Parks
and Recreation Master Plan
·
Proposal
must be a direct infrastructure benefit to the park
·
Proposal
must be a direct benefit to all park users
·
Each
case shall be referred to the Parks and Recreation Commission for review and
recommendation
·
Each
proposal shall involve community and neighborhood input meetings
·
Park
must be appropriate size to support a commercial use
·
Co-location
is not recommended in a city park because of the height and space requirement
that are dictated
·
A
building shall not be allowed unless there is a possibility for dual use,
i.e., restroom/community room facilities etc.?
·
Agreement
shall include a provision to remove pole/equipment and restore area should
provider go away where there is no longer a need, i.e. letter of credit or
bond
·
Each
case shall require a visual impact assessment (visual impact statement)
·
All
installation and restoration costs shall be borne by the provider with no
cost to the city
·
Appropriate
compensation shall be received by the City
Commission Recommendation:
Motion made by Commissioner Etten that the above general conditions be
recommended to the City Council when considering towers in city parks,
seconded by Willmus. Motion approved 7-1 with Commissioner Ristow voting
no.
§ The
following recommendation was made on March 2, 2010 by the Roseville Parks and
Recreation Commission as it relates to a tower in Acorn Park:
o Monopole
(data only):
·
Installation
shall be consistent with the park plan and not exceed the following criteria:
o Dimension of
pole similar to existing light or telephone poles
(X
dimension)
o Height of pole
shall not exceed 100 ft.
o Ground space
shall not exceed 7 x 7 ft
·
Installation
shall prefer combination use with park amenity, i.e. attached to replaced
light pole
·
Installation,
maintenance and operation shall not interfere with park activities and shall
be scheduled with the Parks and Recreation Department
·
Screening
shall be defined by the Parks and Recreation Department
·
Perform
a visual impact assessment (visual impact statement)
·
Agreement
shall include a provision to remove pole/equipment and restore area should
provider go away where there is no longer a need, i.e. letter of credit or
bond
·
Agreement
shall include a provision to have the pole and equipment moved at city
discretion if dictated by Park System Master Plan
·
All
installation and restoration costs shall be borne by the provider with no
cost to the city
Commission Recommendation:
Motion made by Commissioner Stark to recommend to the City Council the above
conditions if a tower is considered in Acorn Park, seconded by Commissioner
D. Holt. Motion passed unanimously.
§ The
following recommendation was made on March 2, 2010 by the Roseville Parks and
Recreation Commission on the distribution of revenues derived from towers in
city parks:
o Revenues:
·
It
is recommended that all tower revenues be deposited in the city general fund
and redistributed to departments through the annual budget process
·
Park
infrastructure improvements and/or acquisitions may be considered in lieu of
cash
Commission Recommendation:
Motion by Commissioner Stark to recommend to the City Council that the above
revenue distribution method be used if towers are installed in city parks,
seconded by D. Holt. Motion passed unanimously.
6.
IMAGINE ROSEVILLE 2025 ACTION STEPS DISCUSSION
Commissioners made the following
suggestions;
§ Need for better use of
technology
§ The key component for
advancing parks, getting people involved and engaged is the need for staffing
positions that have a strong community focus and can support grassroots
efforts for volunteerism and community stewardship
§ Commissioners believe IR
2025 initiatives will be flushed out through the Master Plan process and
result in the alignment of goals for the Commission
7.
DIRECTORS REPORT
§ Master Plan Update
o The
Technical Advisory Team representatives are getting more involved
o A school
district property issue at Fairview Community Center has been brought to the
CAT, planning staff and Parks and Recreation staff are exploring the best way
to include school district properties in the Master Plan
o The design
team are working with the CAT to indentify eight planning areas for the
Master Plan
§ The 2010 PIP was
approved by the Council for $185,000
§ The Rice Creek Watershed
is planning a project that will cleanout Oasis Pond this summer
§ Thank you Sara Brodt
Lenz and Matt Hiber for your service to the Parks and Recreation Commission
and the City of Roseville
o The
application deadline for Commission positions closed last week. There
were 9 applications for the 2 Parks and Recreation Commission.
Interviews will take place March 8 and appointments will be made March 22
8.
OTHER
§ Willmus thanked Sara
Brodt Lenz for all her work over the past 6 years
Meeting adjourned at 8:35 pm
Respectfully Submitted,
Jill Anfang, Assistant Director
|