Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 09/11/2003

Home

Parks/Utilities Supervisor Riverblood explained the Developers Agreement will need to spell out what the cash component of this is as it relates to parks and trails. All of that needs to be wrapped up unless there is a caveat within the agreement that would supercede it. Commissioner Olds stated based on the Council meeting, the Final Plat approval and the Developers Agreement should both come forward together. His interpretation is the Developers Agreement is being pushed forward quickly because of the dollars for real estate changing hands and to get some of the prominent landscaping and groundbreaking completed this fall. His concern, as Mr. Riverblood stated, is with their last meeting the Commission said they will take park dedication in cash. If this goes at a fast pace and they do not have dollars allocated or defined they may end up not having anything because it is not spelled out in the Developers Agreement. Ms. Bartels inquired what parks the Commission would like to see built first. Chairperson Johns responded the central band and the downtown commons area should be built first. The neighborhood components are not a part of public parks. Parks/Utilities Supervisor Riverblood suggested the Commission create a task by time chart to keep on track and am~ounce to everyone when a project is being worked on. Grading issues should have associated timelines with the tasks, such as'~ading appropriately for the sliding hill and the ball fields. Neighborhood Parks Ms. Barrels inquired if the Commission has any preference about the park concept plan for the north park, which includes the sliding hill. Parks/Utilities Supervisor Riverblood indicated he was contacted by Tom LaMere. He wanted to. ensure the bridge in the north park has trail connections to it. He also thought a running track should be included with the south park. They discussed the issue with the school having use of the track and who would be responsible for maintenance. If the City requires the schools to have recreational areas they might not want to get involved in maintenance the school will do anyway. However, while charter schools are popular today, five to ten years from now they might not be around. By having a partnership with the school the City helps to ensure the park will,be there for the furore. South Park Chairperson Johns noted the Commission discussed this extensively at the last meeting and captured it well. She inquired if any of the Commissioners have a firmer conviction on which of the two south park concept plans they prefer. Commissioner Sln'yock indicated in general she favors the plan to the let5 due to the flexibility to change plans and the designation of space. Further discussions, however, are needed with the schools. Park and Recreation Commission/August 19, 2003 Page 2 of 10