My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2017-4-4_PR Comm Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Parks & Recreation
>
Parks & Recreation Commission
>
Packets
>
2017
>
2017-4-4_PR Comm Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/31/2017 2:43:11 PM
Creation date
3/31/2017 2:43:09 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
ROSEVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION <br />1 <br />DRAFT MEETING MINUTES FOR <br />2 <br />March7, 20176:30pm <br />3 <br />4 <br />PRESENT: <br />5Bole, Diedrick, Gelbach,O’Brien, Stoner, Warzecha <br />ABSENT: <br />6Heikkila,Newby <br />STAFF: <br />7Anderson, Brokke,Christensen, McDonagh <br />8 <br />INTRODUCTIONS <br />91. <br />10 <br />ROLL CALL/PUBLICCOMMENT <br />112. <br />12No public in attendance. <br />13 <br />APPROVAL OF MINUTES –February7,2017MEETING <br />143. <br />15Commissioner Diedrick movedto approve the February 7, 2017 meeting minutes. Commissioner O’Brien <br />16seconds. Motion passedunanimously. <br />17 <br />CEDARHOLM GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE REPLACEMENT REVIEW <br />184. <br />19Hagen, Christensen &McIlwain (HCM)were planning to be present for tonight’sMarch 7, 2017 <br />20Commission Meeting. However, it was determined that the meetingwould be a review of the current <br />21designs/concepts and a discussion ofnext stepsbetween Parks and Recreation staff and the Commission. <br />22 <br />23Brokke provided a review of the latest diagrams from HCM, including: <br />24 <br />25Site Opportunities Studypreviouslypresented by HCM atthe February 7, 2017 Commission Meeting <br />26Functional Plan Diagram <br />27Space “pods” can be moved into different configurations <br />o <br />28Design Option A(5,000 sq. ft.) <br />29New location located north of the existingClubhouse <br />o <br />30Design Option B (5,000 sq. ft.) <br />31New facility is placed in the same location as the existing Clubhouse <br />o <br />32Practice green and first tee would need to be moved or modified <br />o <br />33Outdoor gathering space maximizes views of the course <br />o <br />34Design Option C (5,000 sq. ft.) <br />35Expanded and redesigned parking lot <br />o <br />36The Clubhouse would be located next to theexisting maintenance facility <br />o <br />37Practicegreenand firsttee would be relocated <br />o <br />38Design Option B-Revised (3,200 sq. ft.) <br />39Revised design based on identifiedfunding <br />o <br />40Course modifications could be completed at a later date <br />o <br />41The parking lot would be expanded on the south end <br />o <br />42 <br />43Brokke explained that the City Councilis currently contemplating the location of the Roseville License <br />44Center. As part of thatpotentialproject they are looking at including the Historical Society in that process. <br />45Further guidance on the Historical Society and the Cedarholm Clubhouse Renewalwill be discussed with <br />46the City Council. <br />47 <br />48Parking Lot Options <br />49Varying from 68-94 spaces <br />o <br />50Maintenance Building Options <br />51Potential locations of a new maintenance building and covered cart storage <br />o <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.