My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
04/12/01
Ramsey
>
Park & Recreation Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000's
>
2001 (Disc 11)
>
04/12/01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/5/2006 11:57:54 AM
Creation date
5/19/2003 10:35:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Chairperson Cook suggested sending the project forward with the three options presented to the <br />Council and then let them make the decision of which project to complete and decide how much <br />funding they are willing to work with. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johns stated that she did not think that the minimum option was even an option <br />that should be considered. <br /> <br />Chairperson Cook replied then the two options could be presented to the Council. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ostrum stated that he would prefer that the Commission go forward with a <br />recommendation even if the recommendation were to install a new sign with a plan to build <br />around the sign over the next couple of years. Then if the Council wants so assist with funding <br />sooner than the project could be completed in a more timely matter. <br /> <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos stated that the view of the Council in part is the concern of <br />public perception of the entry point to Central Park. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ostrum suggested the that Commission recommend that the full plan be <br />completed with the ultimate goal being to complete the entire project within a three year period <br />or as they can make money available through Capital Improvement and any assistance the <br />Council is willing to give. <br /> <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos stated that the Council had indicated that the water feature and <br />topography was unnecessary, and inquired if the Commission would agree to shift the project <br />from a full project to a partial project and reduce the cost. <br /> <br />Commissioner LaMere replied that he would like the water feature to be included in the project <br />because he felt it gave a different dimension to the park. <br /> <br />Commissioner Ostrum inquired if the Council was opposed to the cost or the design. <br /> <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos replied that he was not sure. One comment that was made by a <br />Councilmember was that they have a lot of wetlands in the City and it might not be necessary to <br />spend money on something that the City provides exposures to in other areas. <br /> <br />Commissioner LaMere replied that water is a unique thing that people like to see. <br /> <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos stated that another concern of the Council was that the water <br />might be a safety hazard. <br /> <br />Commissioner LaMere inquired if the water features would be high maintenance. <br /> <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor Boos replied that the maintenance would be comparable to the <br />maintenance needed on a ball field. He felt that the design was reasonable. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johns stated that she would prefer to see the pond included as part of the project. <br /> <br /> Park and Recreation Commission/April 12,2001 <br /> Page 6 of 8 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.