HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975 10-14 PRMMINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PARK
AND RECREATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
OCTOBER 11, 1975
CITY HALL
Call to order The Brooklyn Center Park and Recreation Commission
met in regular session and was called to order b,7
Chairman Zerban at 7:00 p.m.
Roll Call Chairman Zerban, Commissioners Pickering, Hickman
and Hendrickson. Also present were Park and
Recreation Director Gene Hagel, Councilan Tony
Kuefler and Administrative Assistant Jim Lacina.
Chairman Zerban introduced the new Commissioners,
Commissioner Hickman and Commissioner Hendrickson,
and welcomed them to the Commission. He then com-
mented that Commissioner Johnson requested to be
excused from the meeting.
Approval of Minutes Motion by Commissioner Pickering and seconded by
7-22-75 Commissioner Hendrickson to approve the minutes
of the July 22, 1975 meeting. The motion passed
unanimously.
Park Policy Statement Chairman 7,erban next introduced Mr. Peter Jacobson
of National Biocentric, Inc. He stated that
Mr. Jacobson would be reviewing an issue paper
for the purpose of drafting the park policy state-
ments.
Mr. Jacobson proceeded with a brief review of his
background stating that he had been hired as a
consultant by the City to assist the staff and
Park and Recreation Commission in the preparation
of park policy statements for the park comprehen-
sive plan. He stated that after consultation with
members of the City staff, he had prepared an
issues paper for review by the Commission. He
briefly commented relative to the outline that
would be followed pointing out that at this time
the Commission would be reviewing a draft of
major issues. He stated that these issues were
presented as questions to the Commission for
possible consideration. He indicated that in
this initial review the Commission should look
at these issue statements to determine whether
they are valid issues relative to the development
of the park system and also in terms of additional
issues that should be explored. He stated that
the identification and subsequent resolve of major
issues becomes a basic tool from which policy
direction can be formulated. He further stated
that for the purposes of discussion the issues
have been broken down into five major topics,
thdse.of planning, capital improvements, program-
ming, acquisition, development and operation and
maintenance. He then proceeded with a review of
the planning issue.
He stated that prior to planning for a new system
or new development one must know and understand
completely the present system and measure the
expectations against those services provided by
it. He noted that an imperative factor in planning
is recognizing the needs and major problems. He
indicated that in some instances traditional stan-
dards may not be relevant to specific planning needs,
He pointed out that the needs of the community are
ever changing and that these changing needs must be
taken into consideration when planning for a parks
system,
He then, reviewed a series of questions pertaining
to population responsiveness anti the needs and
desires of the people of the community. Council-
man Kuefler inquired as to the vagueness of
questions in the issues statement and whether or
not the questions were directed towards deficien-
cies in what has already taken place within the
park plan process. Mr. Jacobson stated that the
questions were very general inquiries as to how
the Commission might react and whether they feel
these questions were valid pertaining to policies
in these areas. He commented that the inventory
which was previously done was most certainly
usable but that it might want to be looked at
for additional information if the Commission
sees a need for acquiring that information.
Chairman Zerban stated that he felt the inventory
process would be usable information to accomplish
the planning steps toward policy statements. A
brief discussion then ensued relative to the park
classification standards and how they relate to
the existing structures and uses of those.
Mr. Jacobson reviewed three major questions
which have to be answered when talking about users
of parks, those being who, how often and why. He
stated that when reviewing these factors and
implementing the results into a planning process
you have to allow for changes to be absorbed
within the system. He emphasized planning with
a pulse for changing needs of the system.
is
0
101-14-75 -2-
He next reviewed methods of surveying community
attitudes and survey validity.
The next areas discussed were those of coordinated
planning efforts with Hennepin County, school
districts or private planning consultants or a
combination with the City. He noted that one
issue that would most certainly want to be con-
sidered was the capability for planning. He
also commented relative to the relationship between
the Park and Recreation Commission and other commis-
sions such as the Planning Commission and Conserva-
tion Commission stating that it might be worthwhile
for a review process to exist between the commis-
sions as well as community groups within the City.
He stated that one of the most important factors
of planning for park development is the considera-
tion of the adjacent developments and property
owners.
Recess The Brooklyn Center Park and Recreation Commission
recessed at 8:25 p.m. and resumed at 8:50 p.m.
Mr.. Jacobson then continued with a review of the
planning issue relative to policy development.
He reviewed the City's relationship to the private
sector for providing recreational services. He
raised the question of City cooperation or compe-
tition with a private sector for similar recrea-
tional opportunities. He stated that the current
system provides for five park service areas and
proposed the issue of whether this current source
of participation wad adequate.
He concluded his presentation by discussing citizen
awareness to services and facilities and uses of
specific facilities such as Shingle Creek,
Mississippi River, Palmer Lake Basin. He commented
on the planning relationship between local,
regional and statewide park plans and whether
there should be an integrated parr plan system
with an overall theme of compatibility, philoso-
phically or physically.
He stated that he would continue with the issues
statement relative to capital improvement planning,
acquisition, development and operation and main-
tenance. He suggested that the Commissioners
review the issues statement again in teens of
exploring other possible issues thatmight be con-
sidered in drafting initial policy statements
regarding park planning and development.
-3- 10-14-75
It was the consensus of the Commission to hold
the next meeting on October 28, 1975 and to hold
subsequent meetings on November 18 and 25, 1975.
Motion by Commissioner Pickering and seconded by
Commissioner Hendrickson to adjourn the meeting.
The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn
Center Park and Recreation Commission meeting
adjourned at 9®35 p.m.
Chairman
Meeting Dates
Adjournment 40
0
0
10-14®75 i44