Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Park & Recreation Commission Minutes <br />May 10,2000 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />9.C.1. Deer Tick Handout <br /> <br />The Commissioners discussed a handout regarding deer ticks. Commissioner <br />Westrum noted that a very informative article was in the Wednesday, May 10th <br />Minneapolis Star & Tribune newspaper. It was the consensus of the <br />Commissioners to post the handout in the park and also, to place an article in the <br />Star News regarding deer ticks. <br /> <br />9.C.2. Master Park Plan MaD Chanaes <br /> <br />The Park & Recreation Commissioners and staff reviewed the list of proposed <br />changes to the Master Park Plan map, as detailed in the staff report by Steve <br />Wensman dated May 10, 2000. The list was revised as follows: <br /> <br />- Delete #23, regarding Charest river front property as a future park <br />- Add #36 - Identify future area-wide park/recreational area expansion north of <br />Top of the World Park and east of the railroad grade trail. <br />- Add #37 - Identify Wapiti Park as possible future Community Park, and future trail <br />from Wapiti Park, going east along Lake Orono undeveloped land. <br /> <br />COMMISSIONER REITSMA MOVED TO APPROVE THE CHANGES TO THE MASTER PARK <br />PLAN AS PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT DATED MAY 10, 2000, INCLUDING THE <br />REVISIONS AGREED UPON BY THE COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER DAVE <br />ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />9.C.3. Discuss Regional Park Criteria (adiourn to Conference Room Al <br /> <br />Michele McPherson began the discussion by stating that two possible locations <br />have been identified for area-wide parks: 1) an area north of County Road 33 <br />and west of the railroad grade, and 2) an area east of Highway 169 and north of <br />County Road 33. <br /> <br />Commissioner Reitsma raised questions regarding the definition of an area-wide <br />park, how large an area-wide park should be, and how many acres total does <br />the city anticipate will be needed when the city is fully developed. <br /> <br />Factors which were discussed in determining the acreage for park need <br />projections included: <br />. how many acres of park land per 1 ,000 people is appropriate for this <br />community: <br />. how many residents will Elk River have when it is totally built out: <br />. what is the likelihood of residential development in the gravel mining district <br />when mining is completed: <br />. the impact in population if a second sewer treatment facility were <br />constructed: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Using 43 acres of park land per 1 ,000 people would result in 559 acres for a <br />population of 13,000. A population of 17,000 would mean 731 acres were <br />needed. A figure of 50,000 was suggested for the City's total built-out population. <br />It was felt the figure could be as high as 80,000 if a second sewer treatment plant <br />were built (to serve future residential development in the gravel district). <br />