Laserfiche WebLink
MEMO 10: Mounds View Parks and Recreation Commission <br />FROM: Staff <br />DATE: .tune 25, 1986 <br />RE: Policy for park land use <br />Staff met with representatives from the Silver. View Park neigh- <br />borhood on Thursday, June 12, 1986 and discussed the enclosed <br />policy for park land use. The residents basically concurred with <br />the policy and felt that it was fair and was responsive to their <br />respective needs. <br />From staff's perspective, the key issue is the development of a <br />landscaping plan for each of the neighborhood parks, which will <br />then dictate the existing and/or tuture use of the park property. <br />To that end, I have spoken to City Forester Wriskey and he feels <br />confident that we can develop formal park planting master plans <br />for each of the neighborhood parks during the winter months. <br />Specific suggestions and/or recommendations that we discussed <br />with the Silver blew Park residents regarding planting were to <br />identify two or three species of large canopy trees that would <br />serve as the main landscaping material between the pond and resi- <br />dential lots. We would also utilize some type of a ground cover <br />or low maintenance planting to help better define the park bound- <br />ary. The residents felt this could be workable but requested <br />review and/or input in the process. Staff assured them that they <br />would be involved in the process from beginning to end. <br />One of the other items that was addressed at the meeting was <br />staff's interest in developing the area with reduced maintenance <br />costs as our number one objective. Their were a number of resi- <br />dents that• expressed a strong interest in purchasing park proper- <br />ty, which would obviously reduce the maintance budget completely. <br />Staff's position on this issue is that we should not sell park <br />property unless it is deemed surplus and/or not suitable for <br />general public use. I feel that if we were to sell some of the <br />property, which would allow for larger backyards, we would lose <br />hhe right to control what types of buildings, facilities and/or <br />encroachments that would develop on that property. I feel that <br />the one advantage of reduced maintenance costs would not outweigh <br />the many positive advantages of retaining the park property in <br />public ownership. <br />It cannot be stressed enough that Silver View Park, in the next <br />twenty years, will become the major focal point for public and <br />recreational uses for Mounds View residents, as additional facil- <br />ities are developed, and programming of the facility is in- <br />creased. Ice must continue to be "futurists" as we develop and <br />establish policies for our public lands. <br />RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends <br />the enclosed policy and adopt it <br />1986 and to also take a formal <br />park lands. <br />that the Park Commission review <br />in a formal form on. June 27, <br />position regarding the sale of <br />BKA/sl.l <br />Enclosure <br />