Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Parks, Minneapolis Public Schools, Density, Zoning, etc.
acs
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1364
Joined: March 26th, 2014, 8:41 pm

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby acs » March 22nd, 2016, 8:28 pm

Yes, at least from the Facebook comment threads I've been seeing that involve squabbles between park commissioners.
Oh no way. I'm shocked. Absolutely shocked.

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1983
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby amiller92 » March 23rd, 2016, 8:45 am

I do not understand what is going on. Which is one reason why I do not like the Park Board set up.

Didier
Capella Tower
Posts: 2511
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:11 am
Location: MSP

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby Didier » March 23rd, 2016, 11:39 am


LakeCharles
Foshay Tower
Posts: 898
Joined: January 16th, 2014, 8:34 am
Location: Kingfield

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby LakeCharles » March 23rd, 2016, 12:34 pm

The mayor's concerns (which Bender and Quincy, at least, share) seem pretty legitimate to me. The funding is uncertain, and could lead to cuts in other areas.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby MNdible » March 23rd, 2016, 1:43 pm

I don't know; reading the article, her reasons for the veto seem completely appropriate to me. While there are some good ideas in the proposed funding model, at this point it's entirely half-baked.

LakeCharles
Foshay Tower
Posts: 898
Joined: January 16th, 2014, 8:34 am
Location: Kingfield

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby LakeCharles » March 28th, 2016, 12:36 pm

Hodges and Quincy have a separate plan for tackling parks funding in conjunction with street improvements.

http://www.southwestjournal.com/news/pa ... vestments/

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2424
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby EOst » March 28th, 2016, 4:29 pm

So, in each case, her plan would allocate dramatically (a third!) less to parks and streets than either department actually needs.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby MNdible » March 28th, 2016, 4:52 pm

Hold on to your hats, but would you believe that government units sometimes overestimate what their budgetary needs actually are?

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2424
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby EOst » March 28th, 2016, 5:19 pm

Hold on to your hats, but would you believe that government units sometimes overestimate what their budgetary needs actually are?
Radical idea: Maybe America's habit of giving government agencies dramatically less than they say they need has something to do with America's crisis of deferred maintenance.

Anondson
IDS Center
Posts: 4645
Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby Anondson » April 27th, 2016, 9:50 pm

Quite a few threads this could go in, Bike Infrastructure, Northeast, etc. But construction on .75 miles of East Bank river trail is being started.

https://www.minneapolisparks.org/news/2 ... bank_trail

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1533
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby talindsay » April 28th, 2016, 1:39 pm

It's not clear to me, are they still planning to run it under the Plymouth bridge right against the river, or are they going to make us cross Plymouth at grade up by Sibley St NE? It looks like the original plan included both crossings of Plymouth, but the changed segment cutting across the Scherer Bros. site strongly implies the traffic only coming from the at-grade crossing since it would produce a hairpin turn for the traffic from the other crossing. It seems an odd choice to lay the trail diagonally across the Scherer Bros site, thus making the trail incompatible with redevelopment of that plot, and *NOT* then routing the trail under the Plymouth bridge along the river. Maybe there isn't enough vertical clearance there? I run through here many times a week, and a grade-separated crossing would be a big improvement.

seanrichardryan
IDS Center
Posts: 4092
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Merriam Park, St. Paul

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby seanrichardryan » June 14th, 2016, 8:16 pm

Ending pumping at Lake Hiawatha could end golf, flood basements
http://www.startribune.com/ending-pumpi ... 382959171/
The homeowners were advised that the data is preliminary, and that planners working on the issue would like to meet with them individually. "I don't want people to have financial anxiety over this," area Council Member Andrew Johnson said. "It is hard for me to imagine where homeowners would be left high and dry."
CM Johnson wins most inappropriate pun of the week.
Q. What, what? A. In da butt.

Anondson
IDS Center
Posts: 4645
Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was

Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby Anondson » June 14th, 2016, 8:23 pm

So. Rather than pay for permits to eternally drain a swamp, plus the energy and maintenance costs... How about install sump pumps in affected homes instead?

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby mattaudio » June 15th, 2016, 8:23 am

I will be happy to accept a check from MPRB to pay for the drain tile and sump pump I plan to install in 12 to 18 months.

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1983
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby amiller92 » June 15th, 2016, 9:10 am

Timely, given yesterday's heavy rain. Thankfully, it did not seem to be in to our house (might be the first really big rain since we moved).

It's kind of shocking how much water runs off of people's yards and into alleys, thus into the storm sewer system. Would be nice if there was way less impermeable surface, but there is so much concrete.

Anondson
IDS Center
Posts: 4645
Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby Anondson » June 15th, 2016, 10:03 pm

Thinking through this whole process, would we even know the golf course was grossly violating DNR regulations on pumping water if it weren't for the freak flooding that closed the courses?

Archiapolis
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 768
Joined: November 2nd, 2012, 8:59 am

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby Archiapolis » June 16th, 2016, 8:02 am

I've been wondering about this since last night.

You are telling me that at no point somebody said, "Hey, these pumps run 24-7-365. Is that legitimate?" Nobody from the park board ever looked at this? Whose job is it to monitor this stuff if not the park board?

Shut down the golf-course, return it to wetland and create a "MAC"-like system that pays for excavation, waterproofing/drainage plane, fabric lined drain tile at the footings, detention tanks (if needed), gravel backfill at the perimeter of the houses should be investigated. I'm guessing this won't be cheap...

acs
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1364
Joined: March 26th, 2014, 8:41 pm

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby acs » June 16th, 2016, 8:15 am

That wetland wilderness preserve costs more than zero to maintain and doesn't get you anything in revenue to pay it back. Unlike, say, a golf course.

seanrichardryan
IDS Center
Posts: 4092
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Merriam Park, St. Paul

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby seanrichardryan » June 16th, 2016, 8:32 am

Got to read up thread a year. In addition to closing the golf course they'd sell half the land (in a flood plain nonetheless) to pay for it. And winter sports something something.
Q. What, what? A. In da butt.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

Postby mattaudio » June 16th, 2016, 8:44 am

From what I've heard they would not need to sell land. There may be a way to reallocate the FEMA money since it's an outgrowth of that process. This is also part of Nokomis-Hiawatha Regional Park, which opens up regional funding sources.

That said, I do hope they sell select parts of it for development. The area near Longfellow Ave / Minnehaha Pkwy is a prime spot for senior housing and significant infill, something my neighborhood's housing/development committee is exploring since senior housing is a major concern for our neighborhood. There was a big proposal for the parking lot west of Longfellow Ave back in the 00s boom. Maybe it could be resurrected.

Otherwise, if we need more money, why not just sell Meadowbrook to pay for it?


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests