View Other Items in this Archive | View All Archives | Printable Version

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