CC_Minutes_2010_0208 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, February 08, 2010 Page 12 pathways as part of the planning process; needs of older citizens in park plan- ning; and how to generate more community gathering activities in neighbor- hood parks as well as in Central Park. ^ Walking issues specific to park amenities and access to meet family needs now and in the future Discussion included the demographic make up of the CAT in addressing similar issues as those raised by Councilmember Pust for connectivity and gathering; pe- destrian and bicycle safety issues beyond the parks in connecting to and accessing them; and extensive discussions and considerations to-date in how to cross major roadways to allow access to parks, even though outside the specific jurisdiction of parks, but a critical piece of the broader concept. Councilmember Roe comments: As a representative serving on the CAT, Councilmember Roe noted a recent lis- tening session on the northwest edge of Roseville (Old Highway 8 adjacent to New Brighton) and people questioning the location of various community parks (i.e., Reservoir Woods); how to access the various parks; and what those specific parks offer for programming and/or events. Funding/Resources Councilmember Pust comments: Councilmember Pust expressed concern that conversations about amenities or of- ferings need to be done in an authentic manner, not just brainstorming a "wish list," but rooting that discussion with an awareness of how those amenities or of- ferings are funded. Councilmember Pust sought information on how the CAT was handling that aspect of the discussion as Roseville's park system was com- pared with its neighbors or other communities; and how that connection between wishes and paying for them was addressed. Discussion included assurances by the CAT representatives that this had been kept in the forefront during all discussions, that the Master Plan process was not seen as a "pie-in-the-sky" plan to develop the parks system, but was addressed in a practical manner, seeking input for any implementation strategies. Mr. Brokke noted that discussions during a listening session with area Athletic Associations addressed that issue, with their suggestions for various funding op- tions, whether through partnering between the City and Associations, grant op- portunities, and/or a referendum. Councilmember Pust asked that the CAT make those pieces of information very concrete during the process, and provide a range of costs, not just potential op- tions to get there, noting that in reality, there may be no realistic options for fund- ing of a particular park and/or program. Councilmember Pust recognized the need for brainstorming; however, she suggested that a range of costs, along with