My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-01-94 Park Commission Minutes
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
09-01-94 Park Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2009 9:39:56 AM
Creation date
5/11/2009 2:19:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
MINUTES <br />Parks & Recreation <br />September 1, 1994 <br />Commission <br />that it would be on both lists. The Director stated that <br />the problem with putting it on two lists is that the <br />definition of the two lists is different. <br />Remerowski felt that the portable toilet screening may be <br />too expensive for the 10& list. He felt it should be added <br />to the 1995 General Capital Improvement list in the amount <br />of $10,000. <br />The Director asked Wehrle to summarize what was done to the <br />budget. Wehrle stated that the 1995 General Capital <br />Improvement budget was left the same except for the addition <br />of portable toilet screening in the amount of $10,000. <br />Wehrle asked if the $5,000 for the Gervais Mill Landscaping <br />under the 1995 budget was the funds for the matching grant. <br />Sanders stated that $5,000 is in addition to the matching <br />grant funds. The Director asked how the grant would be <br />funded since it was dropped from the 10% list. Sanders felt <br />that City would come up with the funds. Wehrle stated that <br />if the City comes up with the money, he would prefer that it <br />would be in addition to the $5,000 budgeted for Gervais Mill <br />Landscaping. However, if the City does not have the funds <br />available, the $5,000 for Gervais Mill Landscaping could be <br />used. <br />Wehrle felt that in a year, the Commission will have to put <br />together another five year plan to meet the needs of the <br />future. <br />PARK MASTER Wehrle asked for the Commission's ideas on how to review <br />PLAN the Park Master Plan. He felt that the members should look <br />at it and if they see problems, those items could be <br />discussed at a future meeting. <br />Remerowski stated that it was his idea to review the plan <br />due to the negative comments that were brought up by the <br />general public attending the last meeting. Sanders stated <br />that if the Commission wants certain park projects, they <br />should leave them in the plan even if there is opposition <br />from certain members of the community since conditions <br />change over time. Remerowski commented that things may not <br />change. <br />Wehrle stated that if things do not change, the Commission <br />would have to look at alternate routes for trails or <br />condemnation. He indicated that the City does not favor <br />condemnation. <br />Wehrle stated that if the route for the trail to Pioneer <br />Park is changed to run down Payne Avenue and LaBore Road, <br />some of those residents would probably not want it down <br />-4- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.