Laserfiche WebLink
In looking down the road, the Council has discussed the ideology of development of parks such as <br />Ccnu'al Park as opposed to neighborhood parks. Council has requested that the Commission <br />respond with a pohcy statement relative to your desires for fumr~ park development and where <br />priorities, in your opinion, should lie. The 1994 through 1998 Capital Improvements Program <br />basically results in some expansion of Central Park and contemplated new development of an <br />active bnllfield recreational space north of the Anoka Regional Sanitary Landf'fll, with additional <br />development of a few neighborhood parks in concentrated districts. Further, that all of the above <br />should be connected by a fairly expansive paved, disability sensitive trail system in order to <br />provide improved accessibility to developed parks and avoid development of every one of our 35 <br />to 40 park areas currently in existence. Is this thc right direction, or should wc develop mom fully <br />large recreational areas such as Central Park and assume that people will get there one way or <br />another? Of course, thc other alternative is to develop to one degree or another all of the <br />neighborhood parks without expenditures on large facilities such as Central Park or on trail <br />systems. There arc likely other options as well. Regardless, as part of your consideration of the <br />Parks Capital Improvements now and in the future, a written short-term pohcy should bc entered <br />into the record. <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />1) <br />2) <br />3) <br />4) <br /> <br />Review 1994 ~apital Improvements Program <br />Review Years 1995 through 1998 of the CIP <br />Discuss i~otogy of Park CIP <br />Address the 1999 phase of the CIP <br /> <br />Reviewed by: <br /> <br />City Administrator <br />Parks/Ut~ties Coordinator <br />Finance Officer <br /> <br />PR:07/08/93 <br /> <br /> <br />