2010-03-02_PR Comm Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ROSEVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2010 ROSEVILLE CITY HALL ~ 6:30PM PRESENT: Etten, D.Holt, M.Holt, Jacobson, Brodt Lenz, Pederson, Stark, Willmus ABSENT: Hiber, Ristow STAFF: Brokke, Anfang INTRODUCTIONS/ROLL CALL/PUBLIC COMMENT 1. No Public Comment APPROVAL OF MINUTES – JANUARY 5, 2010 MEETING 2. Commission Recommendation:. Minutes for the January 5, 2010 meeting were approved unanimously COMMUNICATIONS TOWER (CLEARWIRE PROPOSAL) at ACORN PARK 3. Willmus reviewed the current status and actions in regards to the Clearwire Proposal at Acorn Park. th Following the January 25 Council meeting the Clearwire Proposal was sent back to the Parks and Recreation Commission for further discussion and recommendation. Commission discussion followed; Sarah Brodt Lenz shared photos for a tower designed to look like a tree so as not to be as conspicuous. Jason Etten questioned whether we want to open up public land to private use. Dave Holt inquired into where the tower would go if it wasn’t placed in a park. Commissioners agreed that the answer to that question is beyond the scope of the Commission. Ultimate question for the Commission is; do we as a body think this is an appropriate use of the park? Jim Stark voiced his opinion that the direction and policy for the overall use of a park is a Master Plan issue. Dave Holt reminded the Commission that wireless capabilities has been previously discussed with the Master Plan Citizen Advisory Team and Commission. Mary Holt recognized that the proposal designates a large area in the park and to make a decision on this without consideration to the Master Plan process is not appropriate. Sarah Brodt Lenz recommended that any recommendation or policy should address “tall structures” and surrounding support areas (the overall footprint), rather than specific use structures and discuss the proposal from a design standard approach. The Commission discussion was redirected by the question; does the Commission feel permanent commercial uses in a park are appropriate? Mary Holt mentioned that she would feel more positive toward a decision to authorize commercial use of a park if the revenues generated were returned to the parks and recreation system. Jim Stark cautioned that this action might lead to selling a part of the park to maintain infrastructure. Dave Holt encouraged Commissioners to look at potential future uses of the park and how technology fits into those uses. Jason Etten asked about the usefulness of technology if it is not available wide-spread. Commissioners recognized that the Co-Locate Policy is what most everyone is struggling with and questioned whether they are saying yes to one tower in one park or authorizing multiple towers in parks throughout the City. Commissioners talked about whether a decision on this proposal sets precedence for future considerations that haven’t been planned for. Commissioners suggested a moratorium on significant park use issues until the Master Plan process is completed. If we value the process, there needs to be consideration for it. Commissioners asked about the possibility of seeing some design standards, which other Cities have them, what do they look like, especially in regards to those that disguise the look of a structure.