My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-19-2015 CCM
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Minutes
>
City Council 1974 - Present
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
10-19-2015 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/17/2015 10:45:38 AM
Creation date
11/17/2015 10:44:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
CCM
date
10/19/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
City Council Minutes <br />October 19, 2015 <br />Page 7 <br />Ms. Gardner stated commission and community representatives were part of the <br />initial wayfinding plan discussions but the council wasn't in favor of those designs <br />and decided to start the process over. <br />Councilmember Wagner asked if the signs could include digital interactivity and if <br />there was a prioritization table for what signs are created first. <br />Ms. Gardner stated the digital interaction component wasn't part of the current sign <br />design. She indicated the priority of sign replacement would be guided by staff <br />recommendations. <br />Councilmember Westgaard stated it's difficult to know what a priority is until a cost <br />is obtained, and feels the challenge with how parks signage is funded. He asked Mr. <br />Hecker's sign replacement priorities and if he was concerned with the cost to <br />implement signs, knowing it could be a significant portion of the parks and <br />recreation budget. <br />Mr. Hecker stated replacement priority would be for the older signs in the city's <br />signature parks, such as Hillside and Orono Park. He stated his challenge in <br />determining the priority is because the cost is unknown at this time. He stated the <br />biggest challenge his department sees is outsiders to the community calling and <br />commenting on the difficulty in locating certain parks. <br />Mayor Dietz expressed his concern approving the plan without knowing the costs of <br />the signs. He felt the wayfinding plan should be reviewed by the Parks and <br />Recreation Commission and Street Department. <br />Mr. Portner stated it's the council's will as to what they would like to see in a <br />comprehensive wayfinding plan. He indicated in the past, a hodgepodge of signs has <br />been used, sometimes showing multiple messages, which didn't follow the city's <br />brand plan. He indicated the council will always have an opportunity to review <br />various funding options before sign implementation. <br />Mayor Dietz doesn't object to the overall plan, but felt concern with putting funds <br />into a sign instead of improving the amenities of a park. He asked who would <br />approve the signs if brought to the parks commission. <br />Ms. Gardner noted the wayfinding plan includes sign option alternatives for <br />budgeting purposes. She stated parks staff makes recommendations on signage <br />replacement needs dependent on the budget. <br />Councilmember Westgaard felt hesitant to send these back to the commissions, <br />asking who makes the ultimate decision on funds spent, the parks and recreation <br />director or the parks commission. <br />PINEIEI 11 <br />NATURE <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.