Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK C�MMISSION <br /> MEETING HELD ON JUNE 3, 1996 <br /> (#1 Bike/Hike Trail Update - Continued} <br /> McMillan commented that there was no possibility that Gity funds could pay for the trail <br /> to connect to Baker Park She would like to see it constructed to at least the school <br /> property. Goetten said the Council was of a favorable posture towards completion of the <br /> trail but funding would dictate the outcome. McMillan noted that the trail was a City trail <br /> to this point, and it would take Hennepin Park�'s participation to make it a connecting trail <br /> to Baker Park. <br /> (#2) PARK PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES <br /> Flint asked the Commissioners to consider the following questions: <br /> Are we ready to meet with the Council for a work session with the Park Plan in its <br /> current draft? If not, what is necessary to be done? <br /> Are we satisfied with the broad goals and objectives as currently proposed? <br /> Where do we go from here? <br /> Wilson said she was not satisfied at this point and would like to see the large goals <br /> discussed and some agreement made. Flint responded that the Cammissioners have <br /> submitted their ideas and questioned how far the Commission should go before receiving <br /> the Council's input. Wilson said she sees what is labeled as "A" as an overall mission <br /> statement with the other lettered items as subcategories of A. McDermott commented <br /> that all of the lettered items, including A, are part of a vision statement. <br /> When asked how the other items should be handled, Wilson saw them in three categories <br /> with (1) active park areas with goals dealing with improvements and maintenance, (2) <br /> passive parks and nature areas, and (3)trails. She then saw these components follawed up <br /> by financial stipulations. <br /> Beal asked if the goals were in actuality, proposed action, rather than objectives. Ilse <br /> responded that the goals and continuing objectives are documentation for the long term <br /> record, and from that, action is taken. Ilse noted that the goals and objectives may be too <br /> specific, however. McDermott said he was concerned that if the goals were too loose, it <br /> would result in "fluff'. McMillan commented that the objectives are designed not to be <br /> toa specific, ar else, they result in promises that might not happen. McMillan said she <br /> would like to see general direction given without deadlines. McDermott noted that there <br /> was a need for visions for a continuation of the park process. He added that the surveys <br /> and park descriptions were more specific. Wilson responded that once the large goals are <br /> established, then the Commission could get down to the specifics. <br /> 2 <br />