Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-19-24 - PTRC Minutes CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PARKS, TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2024, 6:30 PM ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL MEETING TO ORDER Chair Jill Anderson called the November 19, 2024 meeting of the Parks, Trails, and Recreation Committee to order at 6:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Jill Anderson, Dan Dietz, Kerri Seemann, Nancy Jacobson, Liz Johnson, Tim Nelson, Kate Olson, Emelia Rogers, Eva Acosta and Council Liaison Emily Rousseau OTHERS PRESENT: Recreation Supervisor Matt Johnson ABSENT: Lacy Loosbrock The PTRC members introduced themselves and welcomed new Youth Committee Member Eva Acosta. Recreation Supervisor Matt Johnson affirmed the Oath of Office to Committee Member Eva Acosta 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Committee Member Olson moved and Committee Member Dietz seconded a motion to approve the meeting agenda as written. The motion carried (10-0). 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. October 22, 2024 PTRC Minutes MOTION: Committee Member Rogers moved and Committee Member Olson seconded a motion to approve the meeting minutes as amended. The motion carried (10-0). Page 4 strike “attempts to contact” and say we did contact them. Also don’t need “as well”. Page 6 change Valentine to Sampson. 3. REPORTS A. Council Liaison Update Council Liaison Rousseau updated the committee regarding the City Council Work Session on November 18. The discussion surrounded parks and TCAAP. Some revisions to the original plan were expressed. The consultants will revise and bring it back for further discussion. Council Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 2 directed the JDA representatives to discuss the additions with the developer. We have added several hundred residential units to the southwest corner that were previously zoned for light industrial. The original Parks Memo of Understanding (MOU) listed three parks. Four feels more appropriate now after the addition of those residential units. Council Liaison Rousseau said there is a cluster of large cottonwoods that will be removed from Freeway Park sometime next year. Council Liaison Rousseau share that the budget was discussed at the November 11 Council Work Session. There will be a 15.5% Levy increase which will still under fund us. Council Liaison Rousseau said that one councilmember requested that we remove the Parks Master Plan from 2025 and push it to 2026. That has a budget of $75,000. She is not in favor of putting this off until 2026. She thinks if we wait until 2026 we will need to implement funding that will compete with any trails projects. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said Staff would appreciate having a plan because residents are passionate about our parks. Having a document that points to why the City makes certain decisions, will help with resident relationships. Council Liaison Rousseau said Rotary Club reached out to say they were interested in piloting the Adopt-A-Park program. They are interested in Floral Park. They saw a lot of acres with lots of opportunities with that location. Council has approved having some PTRC Members and Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen meet with the members of Rotary Club to discuss what special projects they would like to work on. She isn’t sure what PTRC role will be. She thinks the PTRC members will serve as a liaison. She said this process is still developing. The hope is to pilot the program this year. At the end of the season, which is May-October, they can discuss what worked and where the gaps may be. Committee Member Jacobson asked if delaying the Park Master Plan is just to save money for this year’s budget. Council Liaison Rousseau said that was the thought from one Councilmember. Eliminating that budget item will not even things out. Chair Anderson asked if it would be beneficial for the PTRC to discuss and make a recommendation to Council to proceed with the Park Master Plan. Council Liaison Rousseau asked if the committee thinks having the Park Master Plan in the budget for 2025 would be more beneficial than waiting until 2026. Chair Anderson thinks the Park Master Plan would give the PTRC a road map. It would be essential to maximize the effectiveness of this group. We could get things done without it, but she thinks it would be helpful to have it. Especially for TCAAP. Council Liaison Rousseau said TCAAP is not in the scope for this but it would be helpful to have a road map. Committee Member Olson asked if a Park Master Plan doesn’t happen, TCAAP wouldn’t be in there. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 3 Council Liaison Rousseau confirmed. The Park Master Plan would include the parks that we currently have. Committee Member Nelson said a criticism he has is how glacially slow things move. Not having a plan would delay everything this committee is thinking about doing. It doesn’t make sense to keep putting it off. He thinks it’s essential. Committee Member Jacobson said there is a new Staff person that will be starting. She wondered if they have any relationship with the Master Plan. Council Liaison Rousseau said the plan was that Staff member would be hired in March, to save a little on the levy. Then the Master Plan work would begin after that new Staff is in place for a month. That person would be the one working side by side with the consultant. Committee Member Olson asked how long a Park Master Plan is typically good for. Her concern is if we spend a lot of money on a Master Plan and TCAAP is not included. Council Liaison Rousseau said it is recommended to complete or review every 10 years. When she worked with the park board and they have a plan for each park. Committee Member Rogers said a volunteer group like this works most effectively when we get requests to assist, rather than being the ones to create plans. We don’t have the expertise for that. A Park Master Plan would be very helpful. Committee Member Jacobson asked if the Council has already decided to remove the Master Plan or is it still an option. Council Liaison Rousseau said it’s still under discussion. She suspects the decision will be made on December 9, when the levy is finalized. Chair Anderson thought the PTRC could make a motion to recommend that Council proceed with the Park Master Plan. They can agree or disagree with our recommendation. It is important that they understand we can be most effective if the plan moves forward. Committee Member Olson worries that if we delay it a year and we need the $75,000 somewhere else, it will get delayed again. Committee Member Jacobson asked if Arden Hills has ever done a Park Master Plan. Recreation Supervisor Johnson confirmed. He thought the last time was 2001 or 2004. Committee Member Olson asked if they expire. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said a master plan could be essential to speeding up the process of regulations and what the mission and goal is for each. There won’t be as many asks because the vision will be set in stone. It makes budgeting for projects in the future so you don’t have to request. Committee Member Nelson assumes a consultant would collect input from the community and PTRC to use in creating the Park Master Plan. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 4 Recreation Supervisor Johnson confirmed. He read the old Park Master Plan and the PTRC had a lot of involvement. There are some things that never happened but having the plan sets the foundation for what community wants. Residents’ feedback will determine what is in the plan. Committee Member Jacobson said it sounds like it would be a valuable document to have completed. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said it is probably the most important thing for Parks and Recreation. Committee Member Nelson thinks it could become obsolete after time but, will provide valuable near-term guidance. This would impact what we do over the next five years. Recreation Supervisor Johnson confirmed, and it will set the standards to allow the City to keep up with the trends that are changing in recreation. It will streamline the vision and goals of the City. Committee Member Johnson asked what other cities the consultants have completed a Park Master Plan for. Council Liaison Rousseau said we don’t have a consultant yet, since the budget hasn’t been approved. She said you can google surrounding cities to see what a Park Master Plan looks like. Committee Member Nelson wondered if the existence of a Park Master Plan facilitate the availability of resources. Recreation Supervisor Johnson confirmed. Council Liaison Rousseau said it could depend on Council. Committee Member Nelson said it seems like anytime the PTRC tries to do something they are told there are no resources. MOTION: Committee Member Nelson moved, and Committee Member Dietz seconded a recommendation that the City Council proceed with the Parks and Trails Master Plan in 2025. The motion carried (10-0). Committee Member Dietz wanted to comment that he watched the Work Session with the City Council on the previous night and his impression is the Councilmembers didn’t feel like they have enough space for all of the park activities that they wanted. He doesn’t know if there is enough footprint for Parks in Rice Creek Commons. It didn’t seem like there was enough room for all of the ball fields or soccer fields with the acreage of parks that are in the plan, as it is. It doesn’t look like there are a lot of parks for all of the families. Committee Member Jacobson attended the meeting and she agrees. There are three parks proposed but one of them is ½ acre in the Town Center. There are two other parks but she thought Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 5 it would be great to have a third park in the southwest corner. She asked what the formula is used to determine how much space is needed. It doesn’t seem like there is a lot of park land. Council Liaison Rousseau asked how they came up with the numbers. They seemed arbitrary and couldn’t give a specific answer. She thought we could have used that formula to apply it to the southwest corner that may encourage the developer to put another park there. There are some other smaller parks that won’t be maintained by the City. They would be under the jurisdiction of an HOA. She shared a map showing where the parks are located. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said all of the parks will be public, but the majority will be HOA maintained. There are only three parks that the City gets input on. Committee Member Jacobson said some cities have established formulas based on density or walking distance. She thinks it makes sense to look at that. This land has been in development discussions for a long time. It doesn’t seem like there is a lot of park land. If the plan is to include active sports in the parks, parking needs to be considered, which takes up a lot of space. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said it is based on a factor of how many houses. The developer has to donate a specific amount of land based on the number of homes. The number may have changed since 2016. Council Liaison Rousseau said of the green spaces, the City only gets to choose three of them. The next step is for the JDA to have discussion with the developer to determine what will be in the City’s scope and what will be private HOA related. She thought the PTRC could send a recommendation to the JDA representatives laying out what you feel strongly about. Committee Member Jacobson doesn’t know if it’s enough, or too much. It’s hard to tell just by looking at the map. She thinks there are a lot of resources for people to go Rice Creek. If Arden Hills wants to make some of the parks active, that is a different discussion. Recreation Supervisor Johnson agreed. He said we need to know if they are neighborhood parks or destination parks. The majority of them are neighborhood parks. If we wanted to have a big ticket item like a ball diamond or a soccer field, we would need a lot of park space. Committee Member Nelson thought the formula for how many parks is based on people, not units of housing. The density formula that the developer is talking about is very conservative. They calculated 1.7 people per unit. That’s a really low number. We could have a lot more people in these spaces and the need for parks will be much greater. Committee Member Jacobson asked if the population number they are using is low. Committee Member Nelson thinks the population assumptions they are using is ridiculously low. Council Liaison Rousseau said they are talking about up to 1,960 units. Discussion ensued regarding how many residents will be in that area. Chair Anderson asked if the PTRC wanted to make a recommendation regarding the park space in the RCC. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 6 Committee Member Olson she isn’t sure that there needs to be a recommendation, but to share that the PTRC is concerned about the amount of park space. Council Liaison Rousseau asked if Recreation Supervisor Johnson could share the committee’s concerns with the JDA Representatives regarding the calculations to get a better understanding about how those numbers were determined. Now that the southwest corner is no longer designated for industrial, but rather will be residential. Recreation Supervisor Johnson read “The area of any required development open space may be reduced by no more than 3%. Location of the open space in Hill or Creek neighborhoods may be moved within those neighborhoods.” Council Liaison Rousseau said the original MOU for the parks only had the three parks. Committee Member Dietz asked if that includes the green space. Council Liaison Rousseau said the map shows all the green space, labeled as open space. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said the total acreage is 24. Committee Member Rogers asked about the Recreation Manager that will be hired. She wondered if that person would be able to make a recommendation. Council Liaison Rousseau said it isn’t clear if the developer will use their own person to come in and put together some of the ideas or if the City will use our own consultant. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Trail and Parks Projects Update Recreation Supervisor Johnson said the Hazelnut parking lot construction project is anticipated to begin in 2025. Everything else on the project list remains the same. He said the parks project will start receiving bids in February and March. In April, the contract will be awarded, and construction will begin. Committee Member Rogers asked about the trail from Lake Valentine Road to Highway 96, on Snelling. She asked which side of the road the design is being built on. There are discrepancies. The curve going south from old highway 10 onto Lake Valentine is a very sharp turn. There are a lot of highschoolers driving that road on the way to school. If the trail is on that side, it could make it dangerous. If the design isn’t finalized, maybe that should be taken into consideration. Recreation Supervisor Johnson will talk to Staff and give an update. Committee Member Olson asked if construction of the two playgrounds will be simultaneous. Recreation Supervisor Johnson confirmed. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 7 B. Work Group Updates Committee Member Jacobson said they have finished their inventory of the rain gardens in the City. The information was provided to Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen and the next step will be to meet with him to determine how the information they collected can be helpful. There are fewer rain gardens that originally thought and they are concentrated in just a couple of areas in the City. Committee Member Rogers said next steps for the Parks Passport is to connect with the Economic Development Committee (EDC). She is wondering about the parks that will be under construction during the upcoming summer. If this program is asking people to go and discover the parks, if it will be a problem. There may need to be some discussion regarding where/how we can designate a spot the residents could safely discover those parks. C. 2025 Work Plan Discussion Chair Anderson summarized the last discussion. The primary topic was prioritizing the items on the list. She wondered if the Park Master Plan should be explicitly stated as a priority on this list. Aside from making their recommendation, she isn’t sure what else the PTRC can do, if Council decides to delay it another year. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said if this is a high priority for the future of parks, trails and recreation, the committee can add it. Chair Anderson isn’t sure how to implement that into the goals. It’s hard for the PTRC to make plans and goal around a master plan that may or may not be pursued. Council Liaison Rousseau said if a Park Master Plan moves forward in 2025, it would probably take most of the summer. So the implementation wouldn’t start until 2026. She is hoping the consultant would want to come in to talk to the PTRC for feedback. She discussed how a similar project is happening on code revisions with the Planning Commission and a consultant. She outlined how that process is working. She thought it was appropriate to put a goal on the list that if the Master Plan goes through we will support it. Committee Member Olson thought she heard a Councilmember state that there has not been recommendation from the PTRC to bring forward the Park Master Plan. It sounded like the person was blaming the PTRC for not bringing forth the idea to create a plan. She is in favor of making that recommendation if that is what the Council is waiting for, from PTRC. She said the motion was made earlier. She thinks if this is a priority, it should be added to the work plan. Committee Member Rogers wondered if it could be added under the main duties. She thought stating that all the goals will be reviewed for compatibility with the Park Master Plan. Committee Member Anderson said we could also just put another item on the list that PTRC will support and provide feedback for the Master Plan. She thinks it’s important that Council hears that PTRC thinks this is a priority. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 8 Committee Member Rogers thinks it’s important to say that PTRC can’t create a Master Plan. The PTRC can support and help develop goals that adhere to the Master Plan. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said looking at the old Master Plan, he doesn’t think the goals need to relate to the Master Plan. It is enough to have it out there that the members of PTRC support creation of a Park Master Plan. Chair Anderson thought rather than creating goals that depend on the Master Plan, it might be better to create a short narrative explaining why having a Park Master Plan is critical to the PTRC but also to the City, in general. Even if Rice Creek Commons isn’t included, it still sets a road map for what that could look like down the road. She doesn’t see how we can move forward without it, when adding so many new residents to the population of Arden Hills. Chair Anderson wanted to address making recommendations for the guidelines for planting on areas encroaching on City property. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said in the previous discussion, he heard PTRC Members saying they didn’t really feel it was in the scope of their positions on the committee to decide what can and cannot be done on an easement. It is very important to set the standard of what is acceptable so the City has something to look to. There are no rules. He thinks it would be a good idea to have some suggestions about what would be appropriate. Committee members don’t have to create the rules, but they can offer guidance on what the rules might be. People are just planting whatever they want that will make their yard appear bigger after a few years. The City can’t just go out there and cut them down. Chair Anderson said that makes sense to her. She struggles with the scope of that is so big. Some people have a fence, shed or an old car. She doesn’t know what PTRC can say about that. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said this would be just about planting. Council Liaison Rousseau said it would need to be very clear that it is just the planting and not other objects. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said the PTRC shouldn’t be dealing with code enforcement. Committee Member Jacobson said everyone plants along the road and in their easements. There are some sensitive areas where people have planted on City property or easements. It appears that they’re using more yard than they own. It’s different when you plant along the street. You can’t plant in the street. There is a finite ending to those plantings. If you are planting in your yard next to City property, that’s more of a gray area. No one should be planting anything off of their property. Until now, Arden Hills has been very hands off. She thinks it should go back to zoning and be laid out to include fences, sheds and trees. It’s difficult to come up with a one size fits all plan for the entire City. Council Liaison Rousseau said maybe it can be anything you can run over with a lawn mower or cut up with a chainsaw. She would be interested in hearing Committee Member Seeman’s thoughts on people planting on City land. She works with invasive species. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 9 Committee Member Seeman said that goes back to the adopt-a-spot program, in Minnetonka, that she brought up before. Residents take care of their own yard and work into the park. They manage the invasive species in their own section near their property. Committee Member Jacobson said that is the opposite of what we have been talking about. Council Liaison Rousseau said that wouldn’t necessarily be an encroachment but rather you are adopting a spot. It specifically limits you to planting. Committee Member Rogers said the resident would adopt an area. They would say what they are thinking of planting. Then PTRC could either say it was a great idea or say no because their choice is an invasive species. That concept is good. It feels impossible to say there are only certain plants you can use in the entire City. That is difficult. It will depend on the soil of the specific property. Chair Anderson asked if Council is looking for the PTRC to give set back or height requirements. It is such a vast topic it would get tricky Council Liaison Rousseau thought PTRC could focus on mitigating planting encroachments. We could try an adopt-a-spot program. Then put it back on Council to give direction on dealing with fences, fire pits, sheds and patios. She said there were 43 locations identified in 2020 that were encroaching, in some way. Chair Anderson asked if it is primarily a legal issue because they are encroaching on City property. Council Liaison Rousseau said there are a couple of spots along New Brighton Boulevard where someone had gotten a permit approval to extend their yard by 10 feet and put a fence there. Will we ever get those 10 feet back? Their neighbor used the approved fence line to place their fence. The City isn’t getting any money for this and losing space. People are putting fire pits. Does the public get to use that fire pit now? It’s on public property. This is about protecting that land. Either we make sure it’s clear that is still City land or making a conscious decision to sell the land to the home owner. Committee Member Dietz said there are infinite possibilities of what could be acceptable. He thinks it would be easier to say what is not acceptable. You can’t install a fence or a fire pit or buckthorn. Recreation Supervisor Johnson thinks the purpose of this is to get a handle on it before it keeps expanding. It is already too late for some of those places. Committee Member Dietz said that is human nature. You mow over the property line or you plant things to expand your lawn. There are some things that are acceptable but some things that aren’t. Chair Anderson said the City could create zones. There would be overlap space. It will be different on different properties. There is a some portion of overlap where the resident acknowledges it’s City property. They can plant there but are also responsible for maintaining it. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 10 Council Liaison Rousseau said that could include a rain garden. She asked if there are any details about the Adopt-A-Spot program. Committee Member Seeman said in Minnetonka it is just an informal program. The Public Works department works with residents. Council Liaison Rousseau asked if we could reach out to Minnetonka and ask about their administrative process. Committee Member Rogers said if that type of program were established, she thinks the PTRC should review those requests and not require a Council action with every request. Chair Anderson asked if she meant variances or if someone wants to do something it would come to us? Committee Member Rogers said that would be the change. In asking permission they are saying they want to partner with the PTRC. There could be a short list of what is not acceptable. Then PTRC could review the application and approve or deny. Committee Member Jacobson think Adopt-A-Spot is a great for planting. What do we do about fences and other hard structures. The City could come through and enforce that. It wouldn’t create any good will. If the concern is that everyone is expanding their property because their neighbor is, we can say this isn’t your land to fence in. Or sell that encroached land to the homeowner. Chair Anderson said we don’t want to have a fence from a trail. If everyone did it, it would be like walking through a hallway rather than a trail. Committee Member Rogers wondered if we have a permit process for fences and sheds. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said we do, but this started years ago. Something got approved that maybe shouldn’t have. Or maybe that resident didn’t pull a permit, at all. Committee Member Olson said she knows there are a few spots in the City where the set backs are ridiculously restrictive. It can’t just be a blanket statement because there are other factors than just property lines. Those residents could choose not to maintain the area and it would look awful. Her opinion is if they are maintaining it, it looks good and it’s not invasive, why do we care? Chair Anderson said the glaring issues are fences and other structures. Committee Member Olson said the City should enforce the code and have the residents remove the encroachment. Council Liaison Rousseau said the PTRC could do a recommendation to define the scope. Committee Member Seeman could still gather information about how an Adopt-a-Spot program could work. Chair Anderson said we could request that Council narrow the scope or define what they are asking for. The other option would be to keep it on the 2025 goals list. She thinks Council has asked for this, a couple of times. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 11 Committee Member Dietz said he thinks we can agree that the PTRC can say what is not acceptable. Committee Member Nelson agreed. We can say invasive species are prohibited. Chair Anderson didn’t think that is what Council is asking for. She doesn’t know what we can give them with out refining the scope. If feels like it extends into different issues that are outside the scope of the PTRC. Committee Member Olson said to build on the idea of not allowing anything invasive, which feels like a given. What if someone planted a Weeping Willow next to a trail? That would not be allowed. She feels we could expand on the list to include more than just invasive species. There could be height limits or if it’s leaning. Committee Member Johnson thought you should be able to plant up to the easements. You couldn’t put a tree on top of a utility easement, in case they need to access those utilities. If you are going to plant something it needs to be able to be cut down. Chair Anderson asked if they committee wanted to take any action at tonight’s meeting or add it to the goals list. Committee Member Olson likes the idea of the PTRC recommending no invasive species. Committee Member Jacobson said we could add what Committee Member Johnson said about not planning over utilities. Committee Member Olson said the electricity company will cut those down if they need access. If a resident spends money and plant something on city property, it’s their loss if it removed. Committee Member Jacobson agreed that is the risk you take. Everything that she has planted along the road could be removed if the City chose to. Committee Member Olson thinks it is a good item to add to the goals list and work towards a process. Chair Anderson thought having Staff define what is being requested. Committee Member Rogers said that could be the goal. Right now PTRC needs to have the request clarified. Committee Member Jacobson said that maybe they could give a couple of examples and PTRC could discuss what we would recommend. Council Liaison Rousseau thinks it would be better to have PTRC say what is acceptable in City space and what is not acceptable. It might be easier to start with what is not acceptable. Maybe establish a list for planting and what would be allowed. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 12 Chair Anderson asked if this is something we want to add to the goals list and we can have further discussion around the ideas brought up tonight. Committee Member Olson said it should be added to the goals. Committee Member Nelson said the only thing we can agree on is native non-invasive species are the only thing allowed. Committee Member Jacobson said we could give that to the Council and then they could offer more clarity on additional steps. Council Liaison Rousseau can bring that back to Council. Chair Anderson asked about the other items on the list. Committee Member Olson listened to part of the TCAAP meeting. There was discussion that there would be dedicated pickle ball areas. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said it was discussed that they would install pickle ball courts rather than tennis courts. Discussion ensued regarding how popular pickle ball is but that it could be a trend that could be gone in ten years. Committee Member Olson said the item should remain on there for when the future park discussions happen. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said two tennis courts are being converted to six pickle ball courts. Chair Anderson asked if they can be used for both pickle ball or tennis. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said just pickle ball. The City doesn’t currently have a dedicated pickle ball court. Committee Member Olson thought it was interesting from the meeting, one gentleman said there was a huge concern about noise violations. He said when a court is converted for pickle ball it should be a certain distance away from residential areas. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said there is screening available but that’s probably not something we’ll do. Committee Member Dietz said with the density expected in that area there will be people right on top of each other and it’s loud. It’s not just the sound of the ball. The people get loud. Discussion ensued regarding when to bring the 2025 Work Goals to Council and a recap of work completed in 2024. Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee – November 19, 2024 Page 13 Chair Anderson and Committee Member Olson will attend the November 25 Council Work Session to present the information. Committee Member Olson thought the biggest concern last year was what needs to get on Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen’s to-do list. She thinks a lot of the PTRC goals don’t have a lot of detail. Committee Member Johnson said it’s hard without a Park Master Plan. Committee Member Olson thinks the time constraints and there isn’t enough staff to do pretty much anything. PTRC wanted to create goals that are realistic and the we could get to. Pushing for the Park Master Plan would help everyone do more substantial work. Chair Anderson asked about a comment she remembered hearing that Staff is getting feedback from residents. She remembered hearing that they are pushing for a master plan. Recreation Supervisor Johnson said he knows Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen really wants one. It would help him a lot. Chair Anderson asked if he is getting community feed back regarding the Master Plan. Recreation Supervisor Johnson confirmed. A Master Plan would help determine maintenance schedules. It would outline how often a bench needs to be replaced or approve trails at a certain rate. Right now someone complains and Staff looks at it. Council Liaison Rousseau asked if Chair Anderson needed any help getting together information for the power point presentation. Chair Anderson said any help she can get would be great. Committee Member Jacobson said everyone who is part of a work group could submit a little information on where they are with their different items. Discussion ensued regarding what items were completed. Chair Anderson said she would like if everyone could email her what they remember completing and she will compile the information. 5. NEW BUSINESS A. None 6. NEXT MEETING A. Tuesday, December 17, 2024 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.