Review of 'Pocket Park' Policy

Periodically, the Park and Recreation Commission reaffirm's its policy of not recommending the satisfaction of Park Dedication by acceptance of small park spaces or 'pocket parks' for new plats - but rather that a more sustainable solution is using the equivalent proceeds (cash dedication) to focus on trail connections between larger neighborhood and community parks; and also further development of these larger existing parks.

This last policy review was performed in the context of the multi-year City Owned Land Inventory project.  Attached is an abstract of that exhaustive process (first attachment), and the following is an excerpt of a part of the Final Draft Policy (second attachment):

"POLICY STATEMENT CRITERIA
(16) The demand for public parks is shifting away from small neighborhood pocket parks
to larger regional community parks. The cost to maintain a large number of small
neighborhood pocket parks can be greater than the cost to maintain a small number of
regional community parks. As such, the City will consider the consolidation of
underutilized pocket parks in favor of larger regional [community] parks".

The purpose of this case is to once again to acknowledge the general policy above, as it relates to the platting of land and associated Park Dedication processes.

 

As part of the aforementioned process; wherein neighborhood connections (trails) to community parks and other regional destinations were explored as a sustainable mechanism for recreation and access to the parks and open space system, trail priorities were identified.

While there are hundreds of miles of potential trail-ways, routes and possible connections, there must be a priority assignment for considering new trails given the ever-present shortfall between funding for trails, and all the trail desires.  These trail priorities may be thought of as two distinct categories:

• Short connections of trails or sidewalks that make 'whole' a larger system of trails, or succinct and coherent connections to destinations.
• Trails that provide both neighborhood connections and are a route to community destinations; and are part of larger 'arterial' trail system within the city.

Examples of the second category above are the Mississippi River Trail, the Lake Itasca Trail, the trail paralleling T. H. #47 or the emerging Trott Brook Trail.  The third attachment is a City of Ramsey map that shows the city's community park system with these connecting 'priority' trails highlighted.  This large, circuitous looped trail may be described as the Circle of Ramsey.

None required - informational only.

Staff recommends affirming the policy of not accepting small, unplanned-for park spaces as part of the Park Dedication processes - and rather, accepting cash for Park Dedication to be programmed for community parks and priority trails within Ramsey.

Motion to reaffirm the policy of not accepting small park spaces as part of the Park Dedication processes - and encourage accepting cash for Park Dedication to be programmed for community parks and priority trails within Ramsey.