PRC MIN 1969-11-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7 additional scheme showed putting green adjacent to bowling green as being generally compatible and relatively passive and quiet sports and would require about the same care and maintenance: showed no changes in the swim complex area but did show area for expansion of the Policy Youth Building and suggested apparatus area be changed to an athletic area used by high school age youmg people with turning bars, trapeze and larger equipment installed: no change shown in Little League field; Forty-niner field squared off-where creek cuts down size of nearby baseball field: creek if covered woulq permit squaring off of 4ger field: Bechet and Griff- in fields remain unchanged as does the Rose Garden except for some slight expansion because of the tennis court plans: the narrow strip through center of park could be used for passive and active family type activities: design includes facilities for every interest group but do need family picnicking areas and this could be treated to bring in beauty and aesthetics which would tie in ' with all fragmented activities: re-study of parking areas has been done with relation to, activities surrounding them-and possibly bus parking; in the study of the three schemes a cost comparison of culverting versus the stream treatment was prepared (See bottom of page 4 and top of this page (S)DCT). Mr. Sue noted that if a flowing stream on a year round basis was desired a recirculating system and pump would move the water through the site: that if culvert was placed in the stream bed and filled over, there would be Ii ttle chance of relieving the grade a,s you would have to be gentle enough for mowing: any treatment of the creek would have to relate to flood control to allow storm wate~s to flow through the site. He further noted that acquisition of pÐoperty to Jeff- erson would provide vistas into park and that all three schemes show large picnic areas are near meadowed àreas; tot apparatus areas: spray pool: and adequate restrooms located throughout park. Mr. Sue asked for additional direction from Commission re schemes presented and suggestions for further exploration. Commission discussion included: That plans were the most invit- ing ones that had ever been proposed; that IIwaterll could be en- joyed by all ages and would provide an enjoyable restful area within the park; that we have other areas in city with a creek or water oriented uses - Stulsaft and Shores; that while open stream system is inviting there is the question of maintenance i.e. the flushing action of creek for some ten months of the year, and other maintenance costs; that we need an active area which supplements the center of the city and if additional prop- erty was available for another ball field and space for other active uses, and if the creek was of gentle flow and contour, it would be appropriate to have an open stream system; that city has a number of passive (small) parks and playgrounds which do not- permit active recreation; that the Commissions initial estimate --~~_._-~ - ---L____~~_......, --.., ,.._-----,_..,,-,-,- _....--------- ---------- ------------------- ---------.. - - -..---- --- - un.. --- '0 - " ," .. .. .- . "-_:'-'.. :-~~-'...' -: -:_, - ..,', -;-u- - -- '-,-,