03-18-14 PTRC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes January 14, 2014 Page 3 survey results, and then to work on a park and trail improvement project list for potential franchise fees. Ms. Olson questioned whether the committee wanted to keep all these items on the work plan and asked for input. Chair and Committee Member Messerly indicated they felt the buckthorn eradication was beyond the scope of the PTRC. Discussion ensued and it was the consensus of the committee to remove the buckthorn eradication from the work plan. Council Liaison McClung suggested the committee focus on things they really want to have an impact on. Ms. Olson indicated she would put together a draft presentation and the committee could decide on which members should present the topics. It was decided the committee would meet on th February 11 at 6:30 p.m. to go over the presentation, before submitting the work plan to Council on February 18th. MOTION: Committee Member Van Valkenburg motioned to go forward with all topics included in the memo except the buckthorn eradication, seconded by Committee Member Petersen. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). C. Committee Chair Nomination Ms. Olson informed that Committee Members Van Valkenburg and Kramlinger have agreed to accept nomination of Chair and Co-Chair of the PTRC. MOTION : Committee Member Petersen moved to have Committee Members Van Valkenburg and Kramlinger as Chair and Co-Chair of the PTRC, seconded by Committee Member Straumann. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). D. Other Unfinished Business Committee Member Messerly indicated he visited six residents on Snelling Avenue Park and all were favorable except one. Mr. Messerly asked if the committee was interested in proceeding with the project. He indicated the cost for the project would be $3,000 for site preparation and planting and an additional $2,185 over a 3-year period. Mr. Katchel indicated his concern with going forward with the restoration is that it would pre-empt any other use of the field and feels the park does get used even if it is not as defined as other parks. Ms. Olson recapped that the City does have limitations on what it can do with the park because the City does not have title to the property. The property was give to the City as part of a park dedication which allows the City to use it for open space. She checked with the attorney and he did indicate prairie grass would be acceptable but something more active like a dog park may not meet that criteria. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not to leave the item on the work plan. The consensus of the committee was to leave this goal on the work plan as it is inexpensive and is low maintenance.