2013-02-05_PR_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ROSEVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 1 MEETING MINUTES FOR JANUARY 10, 2013 2 ROSEVILLE CITY HALL~6:30PM 3 4 PRESENT: 5Azer, Boehm, Diedrick,D. Holt, M. Holt,Ristow ABSENT: 6Wall, Doneen, and Simbecknotified staff ahead of time about beingunable to attend STAFF: 7Anfang,Brokke, Evenson 8 INTRODUCTIONS/ROLL CALL/PUBLIC COMMENT 91. 10None 11 APPROVAL OF MINUTES –DECEMBER 4,2012MEETING 122. Commission Recommendation: 13 14Minutes for the December 4, 2012meeting were approved unanimously. 15 PARKS & RECREATION RENEWAL PROGRAM 163. 17Brokke and Evenson provided Commission with updates on the most recent Renewal 18Program events. 19Staff reviewed the draft Public Engagement Strategy, the draft implementation 20schedule and the proposed meeting schedule. 21Brokke pointed out the Renewal Program logo that was designed with help from the 22Communications staff. This logo is expected to become an identifiable icon that will 23be used on project signage, communications tools and program reports. 24Brokke clarified the intent for meeting notifications is one mailing to the community 25surrounding the project area and additional communication and postings on electronic 26sites like the City Website, Nextdoor.com, email groups, City signage, Roseville 27Patch. Notifications will be mailed about 2 weeks prior to the meetings. 28Jeff walked the Commission through the implementation schedule draft including 29project description, community meeting schedule, projectcosts and start and 30completion dates. 31Commissioners inquired how things will work when there aremultiple meetings on a 32single night –staffed talked about how meetings might be scheduled back-to-back or 33multiple staff facilitating different meetings at the same time. 34Brokke brought the Commission up-to-date on the Playgrounds and Natural 35Resources RFP process. The Best Value process will be used to hire contractors. The 36pre-proposal meeting for these areas is scheduled for January 28. 37Commissioners inquired into the scope of work for the projects and how that o 38might be handled. Evenson replied that one or multiple vendors could be used 39on projects. 40Commissioners asked for more information on the playground projects. Staff o 41explained that $1.6M has been identified for playground replacements over 42the next 3 years. The play areas have been grouped into three levels, smaller 43neighborhood parks will receive playground upgrades costing approximately 44$75,000, sectors can expect a slightly larger playground costing about $125K 45and 2 community play areas are scheduled for Central Park costing about 46$225K each.Roseville has identified a number of criteria for selection 47including diversity and uniqueness as well as a “WOW factor”.In the end the 48project outcomes will be evaluated by happy users, on-time delivery and on- 49budget projects.