Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION <br />MINUTES OF MEETING OF OCTOBER 7, 2008 <br />ROSEVILLE CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS ~ 6:30PM <br /> <br />PRESENT: <br /> Brodt Lenz, Hiber, Kendall, Pederson, Ristow, Stark, Willmus <br />ABSENT: <br /> Johnson, Kamrath, Kruzel (contacted staff prior to meeting) <br />STAFF: <br /> Brokke, Anfang <br /> <br /> INTRODUCTIONS/ROLL CALL/PUBLIC COMMENT <br />1. <br />None <br /> <br /> APPROVAL OF MINUTES – SEPTEMBER 2, 2008 MEETING <br />2. <br />Commission Recommendation:. <br /> Minutes for the September 2, 2008 meeting were approved unanimously <br /> <br /> UNITED PROPERTIES ASSISTED LIVING PROPOSAL <br />3. <br />Willmus excused himself from the presentation and discussion. <br /> <br />Brokke briefed the Commission on a proposed additional development adjacent to the previously discussed <br />Applewood Pointe development at Langton Lake. The second development will include 93 Assisted Living <br />units. In the past United Properties has questioned the park dedication policy as it relates to Assisted Living <br />developments. United Properties believes assisted living residents will not be using park facilities and will <br />have minimal impact on the park. <br /> <br />Commission Discussion followed. <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioners around the table voiced an opinion on the assumption that because residents are <br />residing in an assisted living facility they will not use the park – Commissioners believe this to be a <br />wrong assumption. Assisted Living Residents do use the park facilities and value proximity to <br />Roseville parks. <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioners voiced their opinion that there is no past precedence for special consideration in regards <br />to park dedication for multi unit housing structures. Commissioners also concerned that any deviation <br />from the current park dedication policy would set a dangerous precedence. Commissioners felt there is <br />no reason to deviate from the policy recommended park dedication for this development. <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Stark asked if there is any benefit to considering land dedication for this project. <br /> <br />i.Brokke mentioned that a trail around the wet land is a possibility. <br /> <br />Commission Recommendation: <br /> <br />Motion by Ristow recommending to accept cash in lieu of land for the Assisted Living development at <br />Applewood Pointe at Langton Lake. Second by Hiber. Discussion followed focusing on whether there should <br />be consideration made toward the dedication of land. Ristow withdrew his original motion. <br /> <br /> <br />Motion made by Pederson to table the recommendation of park dedication, as long as it does not delay <br />the process, so that staff can provide the Commission more information on the land option. Second by <br />Brodt Lenz. Motion passed unanimously. <br /> <br /> CONTINUED DISCUSSION on MASTER PLAN RFP <br />4. <br />Brokke presented the updated RFP which incorporated most of the Commissioner comments. <br /> <br />Commissioners recognized that the Master Plan discussion is the result of the Imagine Roseville 2025 findings <br />and the current significant interest by the community in maintaining the park system. The Commission talked <br />about the need to “remaster plan” the system – it is important to bring in today’s community members to add to <br />the discussion. Commissioners also voiced their feelings on while the actual planning process is important the <br />ability to implement the plan is essential. Implementation means will be needed – this may be difficult in <br />today’s economy. <br /> <br />Commissioner Stark mentioned that it would not be wise to halt the planning process at this point. It is <br />important to keep the process moving forward and give people something to look at and make informed <br />decisions. <br /> <br />