My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-26-2002 PTRC Agenda
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee (PTRC)
>
PTRC Minutes (1999 to Present)
>
1999-2009
>
2002
>
11-26-2002 PTRC Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2024 12:19:48 AM
Creation date
7/28/2022 8:41:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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).
View images
View plain text
Arden Hills Parks,Trails and Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes 6 <br /> October 22,2002 <br /> Mr. Moore stated that the wear and tear factor is important and noted that the "Tony Schmidt" <br /> • design is nice and kid-proof. <br /> Committee Member Thompson noted her agreement with the masonry style and suggested <br /> warming the appearance with wood. She stated that they would like something more unique, <br /> with character,warmth and durability for use. Mr. McIlwain suggested considering a natural <br /> stone for the structures and reviewed the style samples with the Committee. <br /> Chair Straumann asked what the pillars at Tony Schmidt are made of. Mr. McIlwain stated that <br /> it is masonry based and stucco wrapped. Mr. Lysne stated that they have had much success in <br /> wrapping the building in wood noting that the repair would only involve removing the section in <br /> need of replacement. <br /> Mr. McIlwain stated that three of the styles discussed fit within the costs the Committee is <br /> considering noting that natural stone could push the cost higher a bit <br /> Mr. Moore noted that the hybrid wood, with Tony Schmidt flair, is the preference. Mr. <br /> McIlwain stated that they would do a more detailed study that would include colors and material <br /> and bring in examples for the next meeting. He stated that they could do further studies for sites <br /> that still carry a concern and suggested a survey of the area to better determine locations for the <br /> structures. <br /> Council Liaison Larson noted the cost estimates stating that they are well over$2 million for five <br /> • parks. He expressed concerns regarding the cost of the facilities stating that it does not include <br /> any other park expenditures. He explained that the Park Fund could not support the costs for all <br /> five parks in addition to anticipated costs for parks. He stated that Council would ask how they <br /> determined the size of the building stating that the enclosed space appears to contribute to costs <br /> significantly. He asked how many parks have permanent lavatory facilities. Ms. Olson stated <br /> that one park has lavatory facilities. Mr. Moore referenced the repairs of the old water main <br /> noting that the intent is to replace the stubs. He further explained that wherever they are doing a <br /> PMP project close to a park that they would start stubbing in to provide water and sanitary at <br /> these parks. <br /> Council Liaison Larson noted the costs for the buildings is substantial and dollars are not <br /> available and suggested deciding what is truly needed at the parks. <br /> Committee Member Thompson stated this is what part of their planning session included adding <br /> they did walk thru to determine the sizes. Council Liaison Larson acknowledged that they did <br /> the walkthrough but expressed concerns that they did not include consideration of the dollars. <br /> Mr. Lysne clarified that this is a master plan and that it is long term. <br /> Committee Member Thompson suggested reviewing the costs and asked if they could determine <br /> what would be appropriate for portable bathrooms. Council Liaison Larson suggested building a <br /> shielded enclosure. <br /> . Ms. Olson acknowledged that with bathrooms comes more maintenance and requirements for <br /> staffing adding that Valentine Park is not the most utilized and that they should consider the most <br /> utilized parks for the bathroom facilities. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.