Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Cook stated a goal should be set to require a certain amount of developed parks, <br />then something has to be done to see this goal is attained. If the amount is always 10% dedication, <br />some parks are never going to be developed. Place the money in a park fund to be spent where it <br />is needed the most. It is the hope with new additions, that if there are no parks in the district, it <br />should be a "must" to develop. If there are already parks in the district, than maybe spend the <br />money on other parks. <br /> <br />City Administrator Schroeder stated it is the City's intent to insure parks in new subdivisions are <br />developed as Stage I and the older subdivisions will be developed pursuant to the districting. The <br />most reasonable time (money-wise) to develop parks is at the time the development/subdivision is <br />being done. <br /> <br />The consensus was that the neighborhood parks should be developed concurrent with subdivision <br />development (Stage I). <br /> <br />2) If we cause development of neighborhood parks as a Stage I improvement... <br /> <br />This was addressed with question #1. <br /> <br />3) What is the priority of various types of park development? <br /> <br />Commissioner Florentius stated it would be helpful to know the costs of certain types of park <br />development. <br /> <br />Commissioner Gookin stated the impression he is getting is that trails are not a high priority. Most <br />parents seem to be more concerned with having neighborhood parks for their children to play in. <br /> <br />Chairperson Hetland stated the question is "Should we have active parks or passive parks. It was <br />previously determined an active park was needed and Central Park was developed because of that <br />need, now it appears we have to build some passive parks (neighborhood) Trails are a great <br />possibility if the City can get the easements, etc., but he feels that this part of it is "off in the <br />distance" as there are many parcels where there are no access to trails. <br /> <br />Parks/Utilities Coordinator Boos stated that neighborhood parks are our high priority; however, <br />trails are very important also. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cook stated that people who haven't experienced a trail corridor wouldn't miss it. <br />He stated we have to learn from past mistakes - at one time only Central Park was being developed <br />and the neighborhood parks were being left out - nothing should really be "put on the back burner" <br />and so trails should be an issue now too. <br /> <br />Commissioner Florentius stated that it is important to define a developed park. <br /> <br />Mr. Boos informed the Commission that the City of Ramsey is fortunate to have two substantial <br />County parks contained within its borders, although they are largely undeveloped. He stated the <br />Commission should think about this: If we were to assume that Ramsey residents have greater <br />access to these recreation resources, should we then assist financially with specific improvements <br />in these County parks? <br /> <br />Mr. Schroeder suggested the Commission review the subdivision ordinance at their leisure and <br />respond individually or address it as a case on the next agenda. <br /> <br />This issue will be placed on a subsequent Park and Recreation Commission agenda for further <br />discussion. <br /> <br />Joint Park & Recreation Commission/City Council - June 11, 1992 <br /> Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br /> <br />