Email/City Park AmenitiesFred Leistiko
now
From:
Cookie Davies
Sent:
Tuesday, November 16, 2010 11:54 AM
To:
Fred Leistiko
Subject:
RE: City Park amenities
Makes sense to me. Thanks!
From: Fred Leistiko
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 11:26 AM
To: Cookie Davies
Subject: RE: City Park amenities
It might be that I will have to look at each one before it is included. The standard will be that if it is a permanent
structure cemented into the around, we will add it to our list. If it is not a permanent structure, ie., sittinR on concrete
blocks or bare ground, it would be considered temporary and can be moved at the whim of the department that owns
it. I will probably ask each department to classify each gazebo, shelter, or shed as a permanent or temporary structure.
The test would be whether it can be easily transported to another location. Does this make sense?
Prod A- I rnktik-n
Ai, rort Manaaer
0tv of Kalisr)ell
1� Rny 1 QQ7
/P
Kalisoell, MT 59903
From; Cookie Davies
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 8:01 AM
To: Fred Leistiko
Subject: RE: City Park amenities
That makes sense. However, we do already have some gazebos listed in our original inventory which was from Amy's
WXK t�XM2
such as in Lion's Park? Some of these have ' lust been added such as in Begg Park, There are also apparently gazebos in
Hawthorne, Greenbriar, and Eastside Park. I don't know when these were added but they are not on Amy's list.
mmm-
From: Fred Leistiko
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 4:29 PM
To: Cookie Davies
Subject: RE: City Park amenities
I would like to limit the items to be inventoried to what would be classified as "Capital Improvements" only, TheParks
Department is responsible for all the rest of the amenities on the grounds. So I would say we limit it to Restrooms and
Shelter Buildings %k/e could add fined stm- ores like Storage' Buildings or Shops. Items like gazebos, playground
equipment, ball courts, etc. are under the Parks annual maintenance budget. Swimming Pools and Skateboard parks are
permanent structures requiring Council approval to build. Try to think of it as "would this require Council approval to
build
Hope that helps draw the line.
C!tw ,f Wnlicn-'11
P n n rt,
it lisla ll. MT 59903
From: Cookie Davies
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 20101:45 PM
To: Fred Leistiko
Cc: Judi Funk
Subject: City Park amenities
Fred,
On a list of the Park amenities and activities available, t
there are multiple amenities listed. Following is the list.
to track information for? I know that we already have some
we do not have some of the Gazebos, playground structures e
that I think we should track. However, if you get down to t
tracking a lot more, such as surface area of basketball cop
information on values of the parks is also very hard to get
Dog Waste Station
Picnic Table
Gazebo
Restroom
Playground
Basketball
Soccer
Baseball
Football
Tennis
Fishing
Swimming
Wildlife Viewing
Walking/Hiking
Disc Golf
Skateboarding
Horseshoes
Community Garden
hat I obtained from Parks & Rec,
Could you pick which ones we want
of these in our original list, but
tc. I have highlighted the ones
he nitty gritty, we could be
rts, tennis courts, etc. The
since they are all tax exempt.
The information for vacant city land and parks should probably be in a separate table in the
database and perhaps have a numbering system for Parks and their amenities and a numbering
system for other vacant city land. I was thinking about creating a numbering system that is
compatible with what we are using. We might begin by giving each park a unique id beginning
with say 300, and reserve numbers 300-399 for parks. That would give us the capability to
have 100 parks and within each park, we could have 300A, 300B, 300C, etc for improvements
within that Park that is numbered 300. The next park would be 301, and the improvements would
be listed 301A, 301B, etc... This may require moving some of the data that we already have on
our list to the different numbering system. vacant land could be numbered with 400+ ..
So far this is the only way I can think of that would work, since the desired information for
parks and vacant lands is going to be different than the information we have given to
improvements on land. For example, an actual piece of real estate is not going to have
structure information, such as construction material, year built etc. I'm kind of thinking
out loud here, so if you have any thoughts, please let us know.
Thanks,
Cookie
3