|
Parks
and Recreation
|
|
Parks and Recreation
Commission Minutes
November 9, 2010
|
PRESENT: Azer,
Doneen, Etten, D. Holt, M. Holt, Jacobson, Pederson, Ristow, Stark, Willmus
STAFF: Brokke,
Anfang, Evenson
GUESTS: Michael
Schroeder, LHB
1. INTRODUCTIONS/ROLL CALL/PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment
2. APPROVAL OF
MINUTES – OCTOBER 5, 2010 MEETING
Commission Recommendation:
Minutes for the October 5, 2010
meeting were approved unanimously. Willmus abstained.
3. PARKS and
RECREATION DISTRICT ZONING CODE DISCUSSION
Brokke provided background
information to the Commission for Zoning Code updates to date.
- Community Development is updating the current Zoning Code,
including the Public Park and Open Space District to be consistent and
draw parallels between zoning districts throughout the City.
o
Parks & Recreation Commission role and responsibility is for
all aspects of Parks & Recreation operations
o
Planning Commission responsibilities is for land use and
development
- The updated Zoning Code draws concerns about the potential
for duplication of efforts by Commissions and Staff
o
Willmus commented on the need for the inclusion of mechanisms to
the code so that the P&R Commission continues to make recommendations to
the Council on P&R related issues
o
Stark added that the P&R Commission can be more restrictive
than the code
o
Willmus added that there appears to be excessive control by the
Planning Commission over Parks development in this version of the code
o
D. Holt commented that Parks and their uses are unique and cannot
easily fit with standards outlined in other sections of the code
§
Willmus echoed the response that parks are unique and there is
not a design standard that fits all parks
§
Commissioners questioned how design standards can be drafted for
a park system with varying and unique features
o
Commissioners commented;
§
that new active uses may be difficult to accommodate within the
limits of the Buffer Strip requirements
§
Screening for dumpsters and other portable facilities could cause
more work for Park maintenance staff
§
On the Master Plan Standards and inquired into whether the Master
Plan standards would trump the Zoning Standards. Commission was unanimous in
the need to be consistent with the Approved Master Plan
o
Commissioners are concerned that the Planning Commission could
make recommendations to the Council on Conditional Uses contrary to the Parks
and Recreation master plan
o
Commissioners inquired into;
§
How the Park and Recreation Zoning Code parallels Zoning Code
for other City owned facilities
§
Who ultimately has authority for Parks and Recreation matters
·
Concern over the standard designation for telecommunication tower
o
Willmus inquired into why private lands are included in the Public Park and Open Space Zoning Code
The Parks and Recreation Commission
strongly recommended referencing in the zoning code’s Statement of Purpose, the
Parks and Recreation Commission’s advisory role to the Council in matters
directly related to Parks and Recreation design standards, as well as,
recognizing that the Parks and Recreation Master Plan act as the standard
controlling Parks and Recreation uses
§
History of Parks and Recreation has been one of high standards
and heavy community involvement
o
Commission also recommended that section 1007.03 Design Standards
include a statement reflecting “subject for review by Parks and Recreation
Commission”
o
Commission Chair Stark summarized the Commission’s discussion by
suggesting that the zoning document may need significant changes to reflect relaxed design standards necessary for the
flexibility needed in our parks
o
Pederson voiced her concern that too much authority has been
placed with the Zoning Administrator in this version and not enough
responsibility is placed on the Parks and Recreation Commission
§
D. Holt questioned why parks recommendations need to go through
zoning if they are not specific to building or development
o
Commission agrees;
§
The spirit of the document can be consistent with other sections
of the Zoning Code but the direct connection and direction needs to be provided
by the adopted Master Plan, they also see the need to spell out the fact that
the Parks and Recreation Commission needs to be part of all review processes for
zoning discussions in our parks
§
They were concerned about the duplication of effort presented by
the proposed Zoning Code
§
The Design Standard detail needs to be adjusted and must be
under the direction and responsibility of
the Parks and Recreation Commission
4. MASTER PLAN FINAL
Michael Schroeder from LHB was
present to review the most recent updates to the Master Plan and provide an
overview of the final document. In summary, Schroeder recognized;
- asset management strategies recommended by Jody Yungers
from Ramsey County as a future need
- an added abbreviated list of partnerships
- completed plan components in the appendices missing from
earlier drafts
- references to the department annual report
- corrections to an interest reporting error made by the
finance department
- inclusion of a short reference list
- document reorganization based on earlier Commission
comment
Commission Recommendation:
Motion by Pederson to recommend
the Roseville City Council adopt the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Second
by Etten. Motion passed unanimously.
5. MASTER PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION DISCUSSION CONTINUED
Brokke, Anfang
and Etten led the discussion based on the Implementation Structure materials
provided in the Commission packet.
o
Commissioner
Ristow suggested that he sees two stages for funding, one for maintenance and
park improvements and a second for a community center. Ristow feels a
referendum should be paid for with local sales tax revenues
o
Commissioner
Stark suggested looking to the process used by the recent legacy sales tax
efforts as a model for success
o
Commissioner
Azer referenced the buzz generated by the renovation and expansion of the
library and the event reopening the library became
o
Commissioners
discussed the importance and strong need for creating and controlling the
implementation message and developing a significant marketing campaign
o
Commissioners
around the table discussed the information provided and made multiple
suggestions for modifications to the structure of the Implementation Process
o
Commissioners
recognized the need to set a plan for the Implementation Process including
connecting with local legislators for consideration for a local sales tax
6. DIRECTORS
REPORT
- Amendments to the alcohol ordinance at the Skating Center has been approved by the Council
- Emerald Ash Borer management plan has been adopted by the
Council
- Central park Fishing Pier is being replaced by the DNR and
the City of Roseville – the DNR will provide the materials and the City
will provide the labor to remove and build the pier
- 2011 Budget process continues
- Staff are working with community members on a Carter Geyen
Memorial at Bruce Russell Park
- School District run/walk is scheduled for this weekend
- FORParks Home Tour is this Friday and Saturday
- Staff have begun making ice at the OVAL and the Golf
Course had a full tee sheet today … only in Roseville Minnesota!
- City is conducting a satisfaction survey through a company
named Cobalt
7. OTHER
- Congratulations Bob on a very successful campaign
Meeting adjourned at 8:50 pm
Respectfully Submitted,
Jill Anfang, Assistant Director