Sunny Full Forecast

City Hall Wants Parks And Rec Input

By 250 News

Tuesday, February 18, 2014 12:51 PM

Prince George, B.C. – City Hall is asking for public input to help guide the decisions it makes regarding recreational and athletic programs and facilities.

Citizens are being encouraged to take part in the first-ever, comprehensive master plan for recreational areas called the Community Service Master Plan.  The input is meant to help council prioritize decisions regarding parks and recreation, which involves things like swimming, team sports, outdoor play, gardening, walking and hiking.

City Park Planner Laurie Ann Kosec says “in order to understand the nature of our community, both now and in the future, we need to assess demographic trends and current and future community development.  Where are kids today and where will they be in the future?  What are the needs of seniors?

At present the City has amenities which include:

-Parkland occupying 7.5% of the land within city limits.

-More than 100 kilometres of hiking and walking trails.

-Over 50 baseball diamonds and sports fields.

-More than 200 recreation programs operated by community groups.

-Olympic and NHL sized ice rinks.

-A 30-foot diving tower at the Aquatic Centre.

Visit the Community Engagement Strategy on the City’s website to learn more about the development of the master plan.

Previous Story - Next Story

Return to Home


I also thought that the city owned a couple off swimming pools and a golf course?
Why do they care the Mayor will do what’s best for us
Don’t ask her she is unapproachable and knows everything

Start maintaining the parks and rec sites we have now would be a good start.
Political ploy #2 - ask for peoples input, then do as you had planned all along. This makes it seem that you are listening to the great unwashed.
So in other words, the City can't win whether it asks for input or not. They'll be slammed either way. Sounds about right.
About a year ago there was a rumor going around our mayor wanted to sell off a lot of our parks to real estate.
Seems like it is more of a way to find out what are the least important amenities and then reduce services to those areas.
Wasn't the reason the golf course deal fell through was because the city wanted - demanded 15% parkland within? The proponent was going to go ahead for 10% I thought the deal was but the city said 'no' to it. Maybe my memory is failing, time for a coffee