The URL can be used to link to this page

071205 PK AgPCITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD PARK COMMISSION MEETING CITY HALL TUESDAY, JULY 12, 2005 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING A. Roll Call Davis Young Farniok Westerlund Wagner Moonen B. Review Agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of May 10, 2005(Att. #2A Draft Summary) B. Park Commission Park Tours of May 24, 2005 (Att. #2B Draft Summary) C. Park Commission Work Session of June 28, 2005 (Att. #2C Draft Summary) 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 4. REPORTS A. Report on City Council Meetings B. Music in the Park Series C. Skate Park Equipment 5. 2005 FIRST AND SECOND QUARTER REPORT FROM COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES — (Att. - #5) 6. WATER QUALITY MONITORING AT MANOR PARK POND — (Att.- #6)(Park Commissioner Julie Westerlund) 7. REQUEST FOR DEDICATION OF SHIRLEY RICE MEMORIAL — (Att.- #7)(Park Commissioner Judy Farniok) 8. EXPLORE METHODS TO REDUCE VANDALISM WITHIN THE PARKS — (Att. - #8) 9. DETERMINE LIAISON FOR JULY AND AUGUST CITY COUNCIL MEETING 10. NEW BUSINESS 11. ADJOURN Council Liaison: July: August: PITY OF SHOREWOOD 6:00 P.M. MANOR PARK PARK COMMISSION MEETING & TOUR 6:30 SILVERWOOD PARK TUESDAY, MAY 24, 2005 7:00 -8:00 P.M. FREEMAN PARK . MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING & TOUR Chair Davis called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Davis, Commissioners Meyer, Young, Westerlund, and late arrival Moonen; and City Engineer Brown Absent: Commissioners Fainiok and Wagner were absent 2. MANOR PARK General comments included the recognition of increased use with the advent of spring, suggestion to keep the volleyball courts, disrepair of the tennis courts. In light of the fact that a sport court surface or rebuilt tennis courts run as high as $135,000 and several courts within the community are in dire need of repair, Brown noted that the Commission will need to evaluate short and long -term solutions. A. POND • Accompanied by MCWD limnologist Lauren Hatch, the Commission discussed ideas for the restoration of Manor Park Pond. Westerlund pointed out that by mid summer, the pond is full of filamentous algae and the tot lot full of goose feces. In an effort to control the goose problem, Westerlund suggested that naturalized plantings be placed around the edge of the pond to deter geese from using this area. Brown mentioned that a proposed new development to the north might further compound the stormwater issues, as well as, the drainage difficulties from the outlet at the intersection, already not functioning well. He indicated that a cooperative agreement will need to be reached with the developer to redo the outlet, correcting the undersized outlet and runoff issues. Since phosphorous will continue to be a problem, Westerlund suggested the City plant a shoreline educational garden and demonstrate to residents with signs a restoration project first hand. She asked Hatch his opinion of what it might take to clean up the pond. Although no guarantee, Hatch stated that aerating the pond might oxygenate it, or investigating an alum pump. Having spoken to renowned limnologist Dick Osgood, Westerlund stated that he suggested the Commission visit Amesbury, where they've successfully been using an alum pump to clean up a 3 Acre pond over the past three years. Though expensive, Hatch explained that an alum pump acts as a phosphorous magnet, sealing the phosphorous at the bottom, provided one can control the external phosphorous additives. He suggested the city collect water samples over the course of the summer and makes an evaluation based on those findings for best practices. Westerlund volunteered to collect the samples over the summer. PARK COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, MAY 24, 2005 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. SILVERWOOD PARK Due to erosion problems, Brown stated that the supposedly soft landing at the base of the slide has been congested with gravel from the hillside. He pointed out that the sliding hill is very popular over the winter months and that the pond is also used for skating. As the city collects quotes for tennis court resurfacing, the Silverwood court will also be addressed. Finally, Brown pointed out that the turf trail, near the pond, has been marked with monuments and runs all the way to the Holiday gas station. Meyer suggested the tennis court/half court basketball court be seal coated as opposed to a resurfaced tennis court surface. 4. FREEMAN PARK While walking the trail around the perimeter of the park, Brown pointed out the new drainage way and park walkway exit at the south end of the park. In addition, he acknowledged the tot lot vandalism mid park. Brown suggested the Commission pull out the feasibility study for the wetland project through the woods and review its merits, the open water walkway, and proposed kiosks, if the Commission is truly looking for a wetland restoration project. Commissioner Moonen joined the Commission at Eddy Station at 8:00 p.m. Upon stopping at the Park Plaza, Brown noted that public works staff would be paving the `y' walkway to the plaza on Thursday, which will free up the Foundation to finish the landscape work for the dedication ceremony June 10, 2005. 0 5. ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS Chair Davis stated that she was pleased by the trail system at Freeman and felt there were never too many trails. She suggested they approach the Foundation to gauge their interest in cooperating on a trail project. Young stated that he liked the idea of moving forward with a do -able project, such as the Manor Park Pond and planting a restoration water garden. He encouraged Westerlund to begin the process of collecting samples for analysis and suggested the neighbors be contacted to solicit their support or volunteerism for the project. Brown encouraged the Commission to consider the goals and priorities contained within each parks master plan to determine whether those listed have been met or if others have been found. Meyer stated that the city should determine the costs for refurbishing the tennis courts. 6. ADJOURNMENT Meyer stated that this would be her last Park Commission meeting, as they had sold their home in Shorewood and would be moving mid June. The Commissioners congratulated her and thanked her for her service. The Commission adjourned their meeting at 8:22 p.m. • RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Kristi B. Anderson Recording Secretary 'CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD PARK COMMISSION MEETING CITY HALL TUESDAY, MAY 10, 2005 7:00 P.M. r MINUTES { Y 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Davis called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Davis, Commissioners Young, Farmok, Westerlund, and Wagner; City Engineer Brown Absent: Commissioners Meyer and Moonen; and City Council liaison Lizee B. Review Agenda Items #5 and #6 were addressed in reverse order. Wagner moved, Westerlund seconded, approving the Agenda as amended. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of April 12, 2005 Westerlund moved, Young seconded, approving the Minutes of the April 12, 2005, Park Commission Meeting as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were none. 4. REPORTS A. Report on City Council Meeting of April 25, 2005 and May 9, 2005 Brown reported that the rehabilitation of the well building at Badger Park was put to bid and would be paid for out of the water fund. Wagner asked whether the construction would impact sports organizations. Brown indicated that the only impact would be that a construction trailer would be parked in some of the hockey spots during construction. On May 9 ' the City Council discussed past public information meetings regarding potential traffic changes at Radisson Road, near Christmas Lake Road. While it will remain two -way traffic for now, Brown pointed out that further thought would need to be given to making it more pedestrian friendly. B. Update on Concessions • Brown reported that Mr. Withum, the new concessionaire, was up and running for a flat fee of $1,200, plus $100 per tournament. The City was looking forward to a successful and long -term relationship with the new vendor. l PARK COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, MAY, 10, 2005 PAGE 2 OF 2 C. Update on Music in the Park Brown reported that members of the City Council donated $300, which the City will match. This, added to the $2,000 budgeted for Music in the Parks and a $500 donation from the Park Foundation, the Commission will be near its estimated $3,200 expenditure for the event. 6. DISCUSS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR PARKS TD Chair Davis asked where the .��oney fOr .— is kept and whether it could be tapped for pond projects or trail extensions. Brown stated that CIP improvements are laid out in the 5 year plan which is a part of the master plan and is scheduled to be updated this year to cover the next 5 years. He pointed out that the City Council has earmarked $10,000 per year for CIP small park improvements, though the Commission has already spent an estimated $14,000 for the skate park improvements. Chair Davis pointed out that $14,000 for the skate park was higher than first anticipated. Brown stated that due to fuel costs, labor, and material costs the price tag had gone up. With regard to the overlay of the skate park surface, Brown stated that Mr. Burry, of Midwest Asphalt Company, has promised to get back to him soon. • Wagner moved, Westerlund seconded, to proceed. with the purchase and placement of the skate park equipment, and once the City has evaluated the need for the overlay to do so. Motion passed 5/0. is Chair Davis asked whether the initial $8,000 budgeted for the equipment last year would be taken out of last year's budget as it was slated, or this year's budget. Brown pointed out that the CIP is a fluid document which can be amended before the City Council to complete worthwhile projects. Wagner inquired who manages the CIP fund balance, noting that it appeared the interest rate was merely 1% on an amount this size. Brown stated that Finance Director Burton, with input from investment advisors, manages the fund. Westerlund asked why the city had declined adding additional park space in lieu of dedication fees. Brown stated that the City had been accepting dedication fees instead of land based on a referendum put before the citizens 12 years ago which indicated they were satisfied with the amount of dedicated park land. Chair Davis suggested the City consider revisiting this from the standpoint of land preservation and passive park use. Brown pointed out that there are few lots left to be developed in Shorewood; therefore, little . funding has been available to make improvements until now based on these few remaining developments such as Cub Foods. Brown cautioned the Commission that, from a construction standpoint, the CIP fund was not significant. Wagner suggested the Commission or City begin to investigate alternate sources of funding. PARK COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, MAY, 10, 2005 PAGE 3 0F 2 • Brown concurred, encouraging the Commnission to take the charge of finding alternate funding, or partners for projects like the water rehab project. 5. REVIEW MASTER PLAN While a review of the master plan or Comp Plan should be done in conjunction with the CIP, Broom asked for comment from the Commission. Westerlund requested additional time to review the master plan, just handed to her this evening, and compare it to the CIP before discussing individual parks this evening. Young suggested the master plan be broken into pieces for ease of evaluation. Westerlund suggested the Commission discuss the CIP with regard to each park on the tour, i.e. Manor, Silverwood, and Freeman, following the park tour itself. Westerlund reported that she had contacted Mr. Osgood, a renowned hinnologist, to join the Commission at Manor Park, though he was unable to attend a staff member of the MCWD volunteered to join the Commission the night of the tour. Young commented that it would be advantageous to have an `expert' on hand at Manor Park to discuss the options or recommendations for the pond. • Brown summarized the Commission's desire to spend more time evaluating the CIP and Master Plan in light of the budget, consider dates for the next park tour and which parks would be evaluated from the Master Plan next. Wagner pointed out that it would be useful to be given a list of major rehab projects slated within the next 5 years as they evaluate the CIP. Brown noted that major updates are done every 10 years with the development of the new comp plan, estimated for 2008. Young stated that he would like to see updates of designated deficiencies inserted into the master plan packet, with dates, following each tour to determine what has changed from year to year with regard to improvements and the CIP. Chair Davis agreed. A. Role of Horticulture and Tree Inventory Chair Davis pointed out that the role of horticulture and a tree inventory should be considered as part of the Master Plan. Brown stated that the sample tree inventory supplied by Chair Davis brought two questions to light, first, what does the Park Commission wish to achieve by performing a tree inventory and why, and what goals would the Commission like to achieve. Chair Davis indicated that she would be interested in determining where the public stood with regard to active versus passive use. She questioned whether the residents value active use, parks, open space, trees, or what people's attitudes might be. Davis felt people have a desire to protect the City's assets, the open spaces, old woods, etc. as part of the bigger picture. PARK COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, MAY, 10, 2005 PAGE 4 OF 2 Wagner stated that the public is well aware that buckthorn is a nuisance and should be informed or taught how to get a handle on it. Although tree inventories are expensive and time consuming, Brown pointed out that, with new technology, there might be an opportunity to incorporate a GPS unit that staff could use for dual purposes, and perform the survey work themselves. Westerlund agreed that a formal tree - inventory would be over the top lvr the clues needs; however, if the Commission could identify a good stand of trees within one of the parks, via aerial photos the Commission could make a recommendation of what the City has and what is worth preserving. Westerlund viewed the inventory as an opportunity for restoration, habitat preservation, hazardous tree identification, and health of current trees. Wagner stated that he liked the idea of educating people, on a small scale, as to the value of a stand of trees or species and showing them an example within one of the parks. Brown asked Westerlund to forward him the name of someone who he could talk to about this process and the cost for performing a small scale inventory. Fai stated that it would be relevant to get more detail of what is in Shorewood's parks to aid the Cormmission in making a judgment of what should be added or preserved. Chair Davis questioned Broom whether he knew if Gideon Glen would become one of the responsibilities of the Park Commission. • Westerlund explained that the City, County, and MCWD have a cooperative agreement in place that indicates that the MCWD will be responsible for the planning and development of the trails and kiosks. The Park Commission, on the other hand, can be involved in the planning process of the interpretive signs and kiosks themselves. Young asked what the timeline for completion was. Westerlund stated that in a year the project should be complete and should consist of three parts, the stonnwater pond with a grid chamber, wetland restoration, and a maple basswood forest preservation project. Chair Davis reiterated her question whether the park would become part of the Commission stewardship and /or if the project would come with an endowment of sorts. Brown stated that those answers were unknown to date. Wagner stated that the real question is how the public will perceive the Gideon Glen area. If it appears to be seen as one of the City parks, then the Commission should have a hand in its stewardship. Brown noted that Gideon Glen would take a few years to be established and would be overseen in the process by several organizations, as the educational and preservation components intermingle. He pointed out that a tree inventory would be key to planning in this case to identify • what is present and where it should be headed. PARK COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, MAY, 10, 2005 PAGE 5 OF 2 0 B. Education on Buckthorn Control and Eradication Since Buckthorn is a community wide problem, Brown stated that it would be beneficial to choose a central location, like a park, where a buckthorn removal program could be instigated for educational purposes, as well as, for beautification. Wagner pointed out that a combination of a tree inventory and buckthorn removal program would be a worthwhile endeavor for the Commission to pursue. Farmok suggested developing an ongoing proactive plan to go after the buckthorn, by providing `weed wrenches' to the public, and an education campaign. Brown pointed out that the city of St. Paul has hit buckthorn on many fronts, including a public education program, providing the tools to remove it, sponsoring buckthorn busting parties, etc. he suggested staff review its education pieces and potentially order some weed wrenches and report back. Farniok encouraged the Commission to choose a visible park, like Freeman, to begin. Target key dates in the fall, following the educational component over the summer, and host a busting parry, which would then be followed up by incorporating removal into the spring clean -up campaign next year. Chair Davis concurred, stating that it would be a good fit for spring clean -up, or as an incentive, the City could volunteer to take the removed buckthorn away. Brown felt a buckthorn removal and education program would be a nice compliment to the save our valuable trees, as discussed earlier. C. Explore Methods to Reduce Vandalism within the Parks Via Work Session and Information From MN Ree & Park Assoc. Chair Davis stated that the gross damage amount of $11,000 was an incredibly high cost to the citizens due to vandalism. Brown stated that he had not had an opportunity to compile a great deal of data from other communities of what they've done to deter vandalism. He commented that it is nice the senior community near Freeman keeps a watchful eye on activity there and reports incidents immediately. While the cameras at Freeman have created some awareness and deterred some vandalism, he would assemble more information to report at a future meeting. Since cameras had been somewhat effective at Freeman, Wagner suggested that the City consider installing decoy cameras at other key locations. DETERMINE LIAISON FOR JUNE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS May - Young June 27 — Chair Davis 8. NEW BUSINESS Farmok asked whether the deer population was a park problem or even a city problem worthy of discussion at some future date. PARK COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, MAY, 10, 2005 PAGE 6 OF 2 Brown stated that deer were not a park issue, nor did the City Council wish to address managing the deer herd population. Wagner asked what the status of some of the new park signs was. Brown stated that both the custom and non - custom designs had been approved, a vendor chosen, and installation would occur soon. The Commission agreed that new signs at the park entrances would be replaced as necessary; however, the rules and directionals would be posted immediately. Chair Davis brought up an issue regarding a joggers complaints regarding sediment along Lake Linden. Brown reported that he had spoken to this individual many times. While there is little that can be done other than deepening the v -ditch near the trail, the resident continues to pursue the matter in an attempt to get the answer he desires, with little regard to the impacts further changes would have on nearby residences. 9. ADJOURN Wagner moved, Westerlund seconded, adjourning the Park Commission Meeting of May 10, 2005 at 9:17 p.m. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Kristi B. Anderson Recording Secretary 0 0 community rec. resources Date: 6/30/05 To: Larry Brown, Park Commission, Honorable Mayor, and City Council CC: Administrator Dawson From: Kristi Anderson and Sally Keefe RE: 2005 First and Second Quarter Report from Community Rec. Resources As you may recall, park usage by sports organization participants was extremely low during the first quarter of 2005 due to the cancellation of hockey rink usage in early January. This cancellation was due to the onset of wann weather that caused the rinks to flood beyond repair for the winter sporting season. The spring season began with a positive response to the new document collection process. Community Rec. Resources staff initiated the new process in early March by electronically mailing documents to all sports organization representatives. Additional organizations, including Minnetonka Lacrosse Association and Twin Cities' Adult Men's Baseball (TC Men's Baseball), were welcomed via direct contact after inquiries had been made during the winter months. Sports data sheets were returned by users electronically allowing an accurate schedule to be drafted by mid - March, much closer to the advent of the spring sporting season. Participants were directed to attend the Spring Sports Information Meeting held on March 16, with completed documents and full fee payment in hand. In return, each representative was given the schedule for the spring sporting season, thus, completing the reciprocal exchange of documents found in the new process. With few exceptions, the collection process went smoothly. CRR staff has learned that total documentation collection will most likely never be fully realized due to the organizational affiliation of Southshore Softball Association (SSSA) and TC Men's Baseball. Each of these organizations must adhere to different timelines specified by their national organizations. CRR staff met with SSSA representatives in early spring, as leadership had changed in that organization, and needed to be made aware of current issues at the time. As a result, SSSA rosters will be distributed to the City by July 1 of each year. Thus, CRR Staff continued to enhance rapport with these organizations through continued communications, and 0 C . . each organization submitted the maximum amount of documentation possible by the requested dates for City submission. 0 The spring sporting season got underway in mid -April despite the wet weather and continues as of this reporting. Most organizations will complete their park usage by mid -July with the exception of SSSA and TC Men's Baseball that conclude their seasons August 18 and 21 respectively. CRR is also pleased to report a soccer tournament was held in Freeman Park June 3 through 5 of this year without reported concerns. Onsite monitoring confirmed successful endeavors by all, including the concession stand, despite the wet weather. It was also observed that parking for tournament use continued to flow throughout the course of the tournament without issue. Conversations held during onsite monitoring with a variety of park users associated with the tournament led CRR Staff to conclude the event was successful for all involved, once again, despite the wet weather. Year round monitoring yields interesting results. Changing seasonal needs pose a challenge for maintenance and use alike. With the advent of spring -like conditions in January, and the persistence of winter weather into the spring, many organizations found themselves at the whim of Mother Nature. Wet weather continues to demand flexibility from the schedule and users alike. Passive use has increased at Freeman Park with the completion of the trail system allowing a wide range of ages to utilize this amenity. Other parks demonstrate increased activity with regular seasonal use being slated for Manor and Badger parks. Badger Park has been the new home for Minnetonka Lacrosse Association and has also served as host for several school district tennis tournaments. Continued communication between the Southshore Community Center, CRR, sports organizations, and other park users regarding events have provided much needed balance to recurrent parking issues in that area. Manor Park offers both organized and non - organized activity throughout the spring on various nights and weekends. CRR Staff looks forward to providing continued park coordinator services in the remaining quarters of the year. The Fall Sports Information Meeting for organized users will be held on July 21 at City Hall with the introduction of the new documentation collection process for those organizations participating in fall and winter park usage. Staff also looks forward to the remaining Music in the Park series with much pride and enthusiasm for the City's efforts. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide park coordinator services to the City. It is always a pleasure, and should you have any questions regarding park usage, monitoring, or reporting, please do not hesitate to contact us, as we remain committed to providing the City with dedication and quality in our services. Community Rec. Resources Kristi Anderson and Sally Keefe • 612.743.4124 2 Me To: From: CC: Date: Re: 1 ---,M City of Shorewood Park Commission Julie Westerlund, Park Commissioner Larry Brown, Public Works Director June 10, 2005 Water Quality Monitoring in Manor Park Pond At the Park Commission's tour on May 24, Lorin Hatch, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) water quality specialist, recommended that the first course of action in improving water quality in the pond at Manor Park should be to collect some water quality data on the pond to determine the nature of pollutant loading and get a baseline of water quality changes over the summer. Mr. Hatch has indicated a willingness to work with the park commission to develop a monitoring plan for this summer. He suggests collecting water samples for analysis of chlorophyll a and phosphorus content as well as collecting data on water clarity, dissolved oxygen, and temperature. Sampling and data collection should be done every 2 weeks throughout the summer for a total of 8 monitoring points. The park commission would need to collect the samples and the data. I am volunteering to do this monitoring on behalf of the park commission. If any other commissioners are interested in participating in the monitoring, please let me know. MCWD has generously offered to the park commission the use of their monitoring equipment (secchi disk, dissolved oxygen /temperature probe). We are also fortunate in that the MCWD has also offered service of sending the water samples to a certified laboratory for analysis and providing the park commission with the resulting data. The cost of lab analysis would need to be covered by the City of Shorewood Park Commission. Lab analysis costs are as follows: Phosphorus: $8.07 per sample Chlorophyll a: $10.76 per sample The total cost for lab analysis for summer 2005 (8 each of the above) would be $150.64. The park commission would also need to purchase sampling bottles at a total cost of $20.00, and cover shipping costs ($5.37) for the season. Total request: $176.01 Requested action: authorize expenditure of $176.01 and authorize commissioner Westerlund to collect samples and data. • lot To: Park Commissioners From: Twila Grout Date: July 11, 2005 Re: Agenda Item 7 — Request for Dedication of Shirley Rice Memorial At Tuesday night's meeting Park Commissioner Judy Fanliok will be requesting a dedication of Shirley Rice Memorial. The Southshore Gardeners would like to install a 5 x 7 bronze plaque at the garden 0 commemorating Shirley. The plaque would say: SHIRLEY RICE 1925 -1977 A friend and activist who cared to make the world a better place I have attached the donor policy for your review also. • 8 -30 -04 DONOR POLICY 1. DONOR RECOGNITION The City of Shorewood seeks to recognize donors who wish to support the City's park system through distinguished effort or substantial gift. This policy determines procedures for recognizing donated amenities or projects, also noted in this policy as a "Substantial Gift ", found within Shorewood parks. This policy covers fixed and/or indefinite periods of time. For the purposes of this policy, "Substantial Gift" is defined as at least 50% of the estimated cost of: (a) new construction, remodeling, or renovation; (b) developing a new real property, i.e. park buildings, structures, real estate, etc.; or 0 (c) replacement of an existing, unnamed facility or landmark that requires substantial renovation at the time of the gift. Items found in this policy include park structures (pavilions, warming houses, shelters, plazas, etc); real estate to be used for parks, trails, or open space, interpretive areas, or active recreation; or other large -scale projects as discussed with the Park Commission and City Council. 2. DONORS AND DONATION "Donors" or "Donation" as defined in this policy means a substantial financial contribution toward the cost of an amenity or project. This contribution is defined as at least 50% of the total estimated cost of stated amenity or project. Recognition may be in honor of individuals, groups of individuals, or corporations. a) Donors or donor representatives must sign a donor agreement that delineates terms of the contributions, unless donor wishes to remain anonymous. The Donor Agreement will include the following: (1) In the event of demolition of a structure, its recognition or any part of it shall be subject to new recommendations. • 8 -30 -04 (2) The style of recognizing structures and facilities should be consistent with the City's visual standards, and adhere to City ordinances. (3) The Director of Public Works or designated staff person is responsible for overseeing compliance with policy requirements, including completion of consultations and approvals, securing signatures on donation agreements by donor, donor representative, and City of Shorewood. (4) Groundbreaking, dedication, or other ceremonies relating to gifts, shall be reviewed by the Park Commission and approved by the City Council. (5) The City Council may rescind a donor's recognition for just cause. * *Method of donor recognition must be agreed upon and formally approved by City Council rip or to signing the donor agreement. (b) The nature of the donation will assist in determining the type of recognition. (c) A plaque, or other negotiated signage, may be placed on a building, room, or facility to recognize a Donor. The design, wording, size, and location of the plaque require the approval of the City Council. (d) A donor recognition or memorial plate may be affixed to routine furniture items. The City shall specify the size and location of the donor plate and the donor will pay for the plate and engraving. The City shall approve the wording of the donor plate and affix the plate to the furniture. (e) Plaques or markers will not be placed for routine tree donations. (f) Donations of a routine nature (e.g., trees, park benches and other furniture) shall be reviewed and approved, if appropriate, by the Public Works Director and/or the Park Commission. (g) The donor shall pay for the delivery and installation of the amenity and /or donor recognition plaque or plate. (h) The option of funding the amenity for life of said amenity is negotiable and would require assurance of sufficient funding. There is no exclusive right to sole recognition in cases of expansion or other structural modifications. 2 8 -30 -04 Recognition carries no power of direction to the City on matters of schedule, design, furnishing, or priority of use. 0 3. PROCESS AND PROCEDURES FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL Any proposal for recognition shall be made through a formal submission process to the Park Commission Tlie Park Commission will make, a recommendation. on the proposal to the City Council. Proposals must have the written approval of the person or corporate representative for whom the recognition is to be given. If the person is deceased, the approval of the family or designated representative should be obtained. If the person is deceased and there is not family or a designated representative, recognition can proceed through the submission process. Procedures governing approval of recognition proposals, of a non - routine nature, are set forth below and may also be supplemented by such operational guidelines as the City of Shorewood may adopt from time to time. Exceptions from policy requirements must be authorized by the City Council in advance of the donation. Step One A Schematic design and details will be submitted to the City of Shorewood and shall include the following elements: (a) A scaled architectural drawing or plan drawn to scale to be completed by a landscape architect or civil engineer, registered in the State of Mimlesota, and would include: 1. site plan 2. architectural details 3. landscape plan 4. tree preservation plan 5. sign or memorial detail Please note: The Schematic design phase of the submission process will be overseen by the appropriate departments of the City of Shorewood according to established procedure. Proposed recognition should be designated at the time of submission of schematic design, as found in Step One, a5. Recognition may not be allowed after the amenity is operational except by Council review and approval. Step Two: After submission of the schematic design, the individual, group, or corporation will fonnally present their request to the Park Commission. The Park Commission will then make a recommendation to City Council. Step Three: Upon approval by City Council, the Donor Agreement will be signed and • kept on record with the City of Shorewood. 3 8 -30 -04 0 5. METHOD OF PAYMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF DONATION Donation associated with recognition proposals can be made by the donor with financial assurity or cash escrow for the full amount of the donation and shall be submitted to the City prior to the commencement of construction of amenity or project. Individual donors may gift a portion of their contribution through an irrevocable trust or a contractual bequest mechanism. Should the donor renege on any payment once the project has commenced and the donor agreement has been signed, the City shall be allowed to keep any portion of the donation already paid, and recognition shall not apply. Should the City fail to use the funds for the stated purpose in the Donor Agreement, the funds shall be returned to the donor. 6. NAMING The City of Shorewood will commemorate long -term service to the community or to a distinguished person, and such recognition is contingent upon Council review and approval. The City of Shorewood will consider naming opportunities for outstanding contributions, such as a parcel of land or new donation outside the geographic confines of the existing park system. The City prefers not to name facilities within its park system that are made possible with donations. Framing a building in honor of a person who has given extraordinary distinguished service to the city will not normally be considered until after his /her substantive formal relationship with the city has ended. The name used should normally be the family name, or in the case of a corporate entity, the shortest possible name. Unless the City Council determines otherwise, a name may be used only once. 7. STEWARDSHIP Stewardship requires that the City of Shorewood honor the expectations of donors and abide by gift agreements, including recognition provisions. Recognition is generally expected to last the lifetime of the building, facility, unit, program, or other endeavor. There may nonetheless be extraordinary circumstances that justify cessation of the use of . a recognition, or "renewed recognition," such as change in use, substantial renovation, or demolition of an existing building, facility, or part thereof, major programmatic changes, 4 8 -30 -04 failure of a donor to meet the financial commitment of the donor agreement, or other situations unforeseeable at the time of the original recognition. In all cases, the City Is Council must approve the renewed recognition. The City of Shorewood sincerely wishes to thank all donors for contributions made to the City. • • CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 • (952) 474 -3236 FAX (952) 474 -0128 • www.d.shorewood.mn.us • cityha11 @d.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE; July 11, 2005 RE: Consideration for Methods to Reduce Vandalism Within the Parks On May 10, 2005, Staff presented a report regarding park vandalism and associated costs for the period of 2000 to date (Refer to Attachment 1). Staff has researched several articles and discussed the situation with several municipalities. All have similar occurrences and feedback on the issue. By far, the most common types of vandalism are burning of portable toilets. One of the reasons for this is ease at which the crime can be performed. ➢ Many of the structures sit in areas that may be dark, or has minimal security lighting. ➢ The crime is easy to perform since all one has to do is open the door and light the toilet paper roll on fire. Since it takes several minutes for the paper to ignite the structure, there is typically adequate time for vandals to escape sight unseen. The second highest occurrence is painted graffiti. Warming houses tend to be the preferred target. The third highest occurrence is damage to turf areas by driving a vehicle on the fields. Attachment 2, is a very interesting article that summarizes the issues and some proposed solutions. While this article discusses topics beyond the area of just parks, there are some very valuable tidbits that can be gleaned from this article. Areas of interest are ➢ Publicize incidents of vandalism ➢ Publicize names of offenders ➢ Lighting and public visibility play key roles in reducing vandalism Public Awareness programs — schools and organizations v� O PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ey..� r► Park Commission Consideration of Methods to Reduce Vandalism July 11, 2005 Page 2 of 2 The subject of installation of cameras has been talked about previously. "Dummy" cameras can be purchased at approximately $15 to $30 each, depending on features desired. Signs declaring the presence of video surveillance can also be purchased for approximately $19.00 each. Keeping the public informed as to the costs and consequences of vandalism can be performed through the newsletter. Staff will present these items on Tuesday night for consideration. • 0 CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 • (952) 474 -3236 FAX (952) 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig - Dawson, City Administrator Larry Brown Director of Public ors / FROM: y � Works DATE: May 7, 2005 RE: Park Vandalism Vandalism within parks is an ongoing and frustrating issue. This issue is one that touches every municipality, county and state. Many articles and publications exist to try to combat this issue. Attachment 1 is an article that was written for park district managers that highlights some key points regarding vandalism and prevention. The article points out that there are many reasons the various acts of vandalism occur, and that there is no one stop measure that is going to stop the abuse. Staff has compiled a list of various acts of vandalism that have occurred over the last five years. This has been included as Attachment 2. Biffs Portable Restrooms What better target is there than a portable restroom? At least the kids think so! The majority of the time, kids limit their activity to tipping over the facilities. Each time a "Biff' is tipped over, the City incurs a fee. When the act involves burning the Biff, the city would normally pay a $500 replacement fee. However, the City has elected to pay a $10.00 per month per facility insurance fee with a zero deductible amount, for a biff that is destroyed. Summary of Other Damage Also attached to the report is a summary of major acts of vandalism that have occurred over the last five years. This does not account for routine acts such as destruction of picnic tables, furniture or other minor items. %5 PRiNTED ON RECY ATTACHMENT 1 Park Commission Park Vandalism May 7, 2005 Page 2 of 2 Many of the major acts of vandalism are covered by insurance. As noted earlier, the City pays a $500 deductible for these acts. Costs listed are the total cost of damage, including labor costs to repair or replace the item damaged. Certainly, the best prevention to park vandalism is by attentive neighbors or watch groups along with ample use of the parks. Staff will present these items for discussion on Tuesday night. • 0 0 VANDALISM CONTROL MANAGEMENT FOR PARIS DISTRICTS Vandalism of park district facilities can be drastically reduced. A new comprehensive approach, Vandalism Control Management, provides a systematic program to reduce facility damage, wasted manhours of repair, and opportunities lost to park users due to vandalism. By Monty L. Christiansen Understanding why facilities are vandalized is the key to reducing the problem. Sometimes just eliminating the temptation by removing the "booty" and making that known is sufficient. Here a notice on a soft drink dispenser tells users "All money removed from this machine daily." [Photo by Monty Christiansen] The ultimate objective of a park management system for vandalism control is not to eliminate all vandalism — that's not realistic — but to reduce unnecessary expenses by using the most cost - effective approaches, including both the appropriate social and physical strategies. There is no single universal solution because vandalism is not a single problem. Actions (vandalistic behavior) and their consequences (vandalistic damages) are separate but related aspects of the total complex problem. A new approach, Vandalism Control Management (VCM) as described in this article is a comprehensive process for park districts. It offers a systematic program to reduce maintenance costs 40 through problem definition, behavior interpretation, objective setting, data collection, strategy selection and implementation, assessment and follow -up. Park vandalism control management must be cost - efficient. Park districts must not invest in vandalism control expenditures which would exceed the potential for saving. Additionally, it is important to maintain a balance between vandalism reduction and facility usability, maintenance, and aesthetics, as well as the environmental and cultural qualities of the park and recreation areas. It is essential that the VCM program be quantifiable, .i.e. there must be demonstrable evidence of effectiveness. DETERMINE WHY VANDALISM OCCURRED "Vandalism" has been used as a label for a broad range of negative behavior, from accidental or trivial incidents to actual criminal activity. While it's not always possible to determine why an incident occurred, reduction of future incidents is more probable when park districts can prevent or prepare for similar events. Not all vandalism is preventable, but it is possible to direct VCM strategies toward reduction of those which can be controlled. The following paragraphs identify forms of vandalism and note which ones may be effectively reduced by vandalism control management. For management purposes, it is possible to group vandalism into four rather broad categories: Inexplicable Vandalism; Deliberate Vandalism; Incidental Vandalism; and Institutionalized Vandalism. ATTACHMENT 1 A. Inexplicable Forms of Vandalism. 0 The first category of vandalism includes those unexplainable, unprovoked, and often wanton acts of destruction. These acts, which may be the result of psychotic or inebriate behavior, cannot be anticipated and diverted. The only defenses a park district can use against these incidents are basic law enforcement, securing the park and its facilities after hours, and hardening susceptible targets to reduce damage. While this type of vandalism can be very destructive, it is fortunate that it is not the most common. B. Deliberate Forms of Vandalism. These forms of hard core vandalism are intentional, premeditated, and willful. Sometimes called "vandalism for revenge", vindictive or malicious acts of vandalism may account for more cases of vandalism than is known. The grievance perceived by the perpetrator may be the result of a park citation or other embarassing situation in the park, unavailability of a favorite facility because of other users, or even an imagined complaint. The vandalism is often an effort to "get even ". It is not possible to underestimate the significance fair, courteous, and non - embarrassing treatment of park users, even as wrong - doers, has upon preventing possible destructive, vindictive vandalism. Some forms of deliberate vandalism are done for profit or gain. These range from simple petty theft to larger magnitudes of stealing. Predatory incidents vary from stripping or breaking off materials which can be sold as recyclable scrap. (Common park district targets: wiring, fixtures, metal gutters or fencing, timber, and even light poles.) Sometimes park facilities are vandalized to gain access to loot or steal — vending machines, pay phones, or storage rooms. Stolen park signs are popular for souvenirs or room displays. Special precautions must be used to prevent sign removal, as well as that of picnic tables; grills; benches; newly planted trees, bushes, and sod; and specimen evergreen trees (Christmas trees). Two special types of deliberate vandalism have been identified. In both of these cases, the damage done is only a tactic or is secondary to a perceived "right." Occasionally individuals damage secured facilities to gain entry, not to loot or steal, but to use the facilities. They break locked gates, cut chainlink fencing, jimmy door locks, etc., to use closed tennis courts, swimming pools, basketball courts, restrooms, and other park facilities. On the other hand, park facilities may be deliberately damaged or defaced to advance some end or cause, rather than to acquire money, property, or to use a facility. Usually resulting in graffiti or disfigurement, the act is primarily to gain attention or leave a message of sorts. C. Incidental Forms of Vandalism. These are the most common incidents of property damage in park districts. While they do not usually receive newspaper headlines and public attention, they cause erosive and progressive damage that accumulates until an area becomes dilapidated and requires costly maintenance. Acts of incidental vandalism, more than any other categories of damage- causing behavior, are often avoidable or preventable. It is possible to effectively reduce incidental vandalism in parks and thereby achieve a significant maintenance cost saving. It can be the result of play. It is natural for children to take things apart, climb trees, throw stones, or scribble on walls, and things may be damaged during such activities. Practical jokes frequently require additional maintenance and cleanup. Lack of things to do, boredom, and loitering by youth may result in activities which make areas messy, unattractive, or possibly offensive to other park users. Park resources also may be damaged due to thoughtlessness, indifference, or disregard. Common examples include littering; picking flowers; throwing knives into trees, benches, or tables; breaking limbs off trees and loose boards from park furniture for firewood; etc. Most of these acts of incidental vandalism are avoidable and preventable. They can be responsive to various social approaches to vandalism reduction and prevention techniques which are cheaper than the repair and replacement costs if these forms of vandalism are unchecked. "Vandalism" has been used as a label for a broad range of negative behavior, from accidental or trivial incidents to actual criminal activity. D. Institutionalized Forms of Vandalism. There are situations when property - damaging activities have become tolerated, acceptable, or "normalized." For example, the litter left at a pavilion or recreation center which has been reserved or rented is usually considered "normal wear and tear" comparable to the loss of towels and ash trays by hotels. Some park agencies are now requiring a damage deposit with each reservation from which the cost of clean -up and repairs is deducted. There are certain occasions on which some "ritualistic" vandalism is expected, condoned, or (by some) encouraged. Locally this may be Halloween, high school senior prank days, club initiation nights, home - corning, graduation, or (for adults) labor strikes. Typically some semi - protected group is permitted behavior which usually is not tolerated. Unless the behavior is excessive, the normal rules are suspended and the damaged is repaired with little fanfare or recourse. SELECT APPROPRIATE STRATEGIES FOR VANDALISM CONTROL VCM strategies should be based upon a reasonable conjecture about the motives or rationale for vandalism, a knowledge of the types of damage and degree of severity incurred, and the vandalism control resources available. Some strategies are proactive — i.e. preventative. They are implemented before vandalism occurs. Others are reactive — i.e. remedial. They are implemented to correct conditions which proved to be susceptible to vandalism, modify or adapt facilities against similar future damage. Social strategies are concerned with the behavior of park users; physical strategies affect the facilities and resources of the park district. A combination of social and physical strategies — proactive initially and reactive if necessary — should be selected as a comprehensive package or program; no single solution will control the complex variety of problems collectively described as vandalism. In many cases it may be possible to eliminate or modify vandalistic conduct and thus reduce repair costs. A. Social Strategies. The social approach to vandalism control is most effective with incidental forms of vandalism, institutionalized vandalism, and inebriate activities. These may be avoidable, preventable, and thus controllable by social techniques more than the more deliberate acts of vandalism. Park districts have five basic social "tools" to reduce vandalism: (1) publicity and public relations; (2) education; (3) rule enforcement; (4) programming and general operations; and (5) cooperation. 1. Publicity. It is important that park districts have a clear policy regarding publicity about vandalism. Policy considerations include the extent of damage incurred, necessity to notify police (whose records are public information), existence of a public education campaign to reduce vandalism, existence of a reward policy, and the use of vandalism control cooperative programs. 2. Education. Park district staff should be trained to anticipate and prevent instances of vandalism before they occur, to minimize existing opportunities for vandalism, and to modify vandalism targets to reduce repeated damages. They should understand the causes and types of vandalism, social and physical strategies, how to use incident and periodic inspection procedures, etc. Staff should be trained in positive public contact and public relations. All staff — whether providing program services, maintenance, protection, or law enforcement — should treat the park user as an individual and help create a social atmosphere of friendliness between the park visitor and the district. The keys to education as a social tool to reduce vandalism are the defining and understanding of the objective or purpose of each educational effort, focusing in on specific target audiences, and utilizing appealing and effective techniques. Educational campaigns for park users should emphasize avoidable or preventable acts of incidental vandalism — it is not likely that deliberate vandalism can be reduced significantly by public appeals and education. 3. Rule Enforcement. There are several important considerations about park district rule enforcement: adoption of realistic, enforceable rules and regulations; use of perceived presence of authority through employee visibility; establishment of financial incentive and reward programs; and adaptive surveillance. Park regulations must be presented to park visitors in clear, positive, reasonable, and understandable language. It is best to avoid an authoritarian or "bossy" atmosphere in signage. Park district personnel may be available in a non - conspicuous manner. Uniforms provide public visibility. The presence of park district staff — maintenance crews, program leaders, lifeguards, rangers, receptionists, even uniformed park volunteers — provides a feeling that the district is readily in control of the situation. There are several approaches to financial incentives /rewards. One technique has been to establish a vested interest for regular special facility users (such as swimming pools or skating rinks) by creation of a "vandalism repair fund" for that facility. Users are informed that the balance of the fund at the end of the season will be available for a special closing program or event. They are encouraged to help keep vandalism costs down and become aware of the personal costs of vandalism, in terms of fiscal outlay and possible experiences lost. Rewards for information leading to the arrest and conviction of individuals who caused major vandalism have been effective when reward policies are explicit about the minimum extent of damages for which a reward would be offered and minimum criminal charges to be filed. In some cases the reward might be recovered from the convicted individual if the park district is able to obtain a decree of restitution as well as an imposed fire. Adaptive surveillance based upon review of periodic park inspections and vandalism incident reports can concentrate on frequent targets. Some parks have incorporated special watches, or extra forces — including volunteers — to patrol parks at irregular times during heavy use periods. 4. Programming and General Operations. Three general operations strategies to reduce vandalism are recommended: (1) provide limited opportunity for vandalism to occur by heavy use of park facilities through active programming and scheduling; (2) require damage deposits for reserved use of park facilities, and (3) remove temptation by removing readily accessible booty. It is natural for children to take things apart, climb trees, throw stones, or scribble on walls, and things may be damaged during such activities. 5. Cooperation. Interagency and community group cooperation has been effective. Where public schools are adjacent to park district land or when recreation programs take place in school facilities, cooperation is logical. There have also been a variety of attempts to establish "Neighborhood Watch ", "Adopt -A- Park ", or "Stewardship" organizations to monitor and report park vandalism in progress, rather than to have to discover the damage after the vandals have gone. Youth patrols have also been used. Many civic and service organizations have contributed time, labor, materials, and funding for park facilities. They might support community education vandalism control programs; local Speakers Bureau or Toastmasters may be willing to make presentations in behalf of vandalism control. There appear to be two benefits from cooperation with courts: park districts may receive equitable restitution to pay for necessary repairs due to the vandalism and convicted offenders may receive rehabilitation through a court referral work program. (It should be noted that the court impact upon the total vandalism problem is, in reality, minimal because the number of individuals arrested and convicted of a criminal offense due to vandalism has been very small.) B. Physcial Strategies. Careful design and adaptive maintenance are physical strategies for vandalism control. These are best applied in conjunction with social strategies as a part of a complete VCM program. A well - documented record of vandalism - caused repairs and the effects of adaptive maintenance can help update park district specifications for standard facilities and prevent repetition of previous mistakes, omit easily vandalized designs, and provide "hardened" facilities. An adaptive maintenance program, which improves vandalized items by changing or strengthening broken parts, is better than repairing a damaged facility back to its previous condition. is There are six principal physical vandalism control strategies: 1. Stop 'em from doing it! The ultimate protection from vandalism is to prevent it from occurring by controlling access and adequately securing closed facilities. 2. Make it difficult and time - consuming! Much incidental vandalism is the result of impulsive actions, which to the individual, appear to be so easy to do without threat of disclosure or punishment. By increasing the difficulty or risk, it is possible to make some vandalism not worth the effort required. While this will not stop the determined vandal, it can provide a deterrent to opportunistic or incidental vandalism. 3. Let 'em do it, but to something else! There are various fun activities, seemingly innocuous and insignificant by themselves (such as carving initials in trees, writing on walls, etc.), which can individualy or collectively abuse facilities or dilapidate an area. In some instances, it would be more effective to provide tempting legal alternative or expendable targets for such actions. 4. Protect and strengthen the targets! No park is vandal - resistant.. Some facilities, such as drinking fountains, lamps, and restroom fixtures, are inherently susceptible to damage. Others, such as picnic tables and benches, are conspicuous and tempting targets; and still others routinely receive damaging abuse or misuse. Often it is cost effective to protect these facilities by using stronger materials, more durable products, and heavy -duty construction. The initial extra cost is cheaper over the life of the facility than frequent and costly repairs to unhardened targets because of vandalism. 5. Make it easy to fix afterwards! Certain forms of vandalism are unpreventable, or prevention may be prohibitively expensive. One example is restroom graffiti. In these situations, periodic repair or refurbishing is an acceptable procedure to provide a specific level of maintenance. These facilities should be modified to make periodic restorations quick, convenient. and economical. Modifications should be based upon the typical vandalistic damage incurred (besides graffiti, other forms of damage to consider here are disassembly, breakage, or blockage). Provisions may include use of a special surface sealer, replacing venerable materials and using special fasteners, to providing convenient access for repairmen. Conspicuously "branded" portable items make park district ownership obvious and helps in the recovery of items removed from the park and later discovered elsewhere. Often it is cost effective to protect facilities by using stronger materials, more durable products, and . heavy -duty construction. 6. Take away their masks of secrecy! There are instances (for example, when stolen property might be recovered, repair would be very expensive, health and safety of individuals could be impaired, or when restitution by convicted vandals is a principal source of funding for repairs) when it is recommended that facilities be sited and maintained for easy inspection and / or surveillance — either electronic or with park district rangers, police, or other special personnel. The presence of the surveillance force may deter some who are unwilling to risk loss of anonymity. ASSESSMENT AND FOLLOW -UP By making comparison between current and previous conditions, strategies can be evaluated. Cost savings and problem reduction can be assessed for each strategy to determine effectiveness. Those strategies which are successful may be combined with modified, revised, or completely new strategies to replace unsuccessful approaches. The vandalism control management process mst be dynamic, flexible, and reactive to change; the same as any other management process. REFERENCES VANDALISM CONTROL MANAGEMENT FOR PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS. National Park Service, Technical Services Program; Philadelphia. (1982). MANAGING VANDALISM: A GUIDE TO REDUCING DAMAGE IN PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES. Parkman Center for Urban Affairs, in cooperation with the Parks and Recreation Department; Boston (1978). REDUCING PARK VANDALISM. Upper Plain State Innovation Group; Bismark, ND(1981). Life. Be in it: • DAMAGE TO BIFFS PORTABLE TOILETS _Tip: puers Date ._Pa ... Cost , 5/1/2001 Freeman I $20.00 Total $20.00 6/18/2003 Skate Park $20.00 Date _ Par_k . ' Gos# 8/6/2002 Bad er $20.00 4/2212002 Freeman $40.00 Total $60.00 6/18/2003 Skate Park $20.00 6/24/ 2003 Skate Park $2 0.00 5/29/2003 Freeman $20.00 i 0/31 /2003 Manor $20.00 9/10/2003 Freeman $20.00 Biffs - Year 2000 Dama `ed ._ . :Date. POlFreeman _.Park Re airlDe$tro ed Gost 5/8/20 Destro ed $0 Biffs - Year 2001 - Dame' ed Biffs - Year 2002 Riffs - Year 2003 Biffs - Year 2004 Date Park;._ ..:ate airlDestro ed Gost ' 6/22/20041 Cathcart Destroyed $0 5/24/2004 Cathcart Destro ed $0 ATTACHMENT 2 0 I] City of Shorewood Vandalism Act Cost Restoration Date Park Facility Painted Graffiti on Warmin House $ 225.00 Painted Warmin House July, 2000 Manor Park Graffiti on Well House sidin $ 275.00 Re Jul , 2000 Silverwood Park Painted $ 50.00 Mm or Dama -fire extin uished Au , 2000 Freeman Park Park Shelter set on fire $ 75.00 Sanded and repaired surface Dec, 2000 Cathcart Park Curly Slide damaged b ice skates $ 600.00 Replaced interior Jan, 2001 Cathcart Park Destroyed interior of Warming House $ 525.00 Repair s stem and restore turf June, 2001 Freeman Park Damage to fields &irri ation b car 600.00 Remove case and hone July, 2001 Freeman Park Damage to Display Case and Coin Phone Jul , 2001 Freeman Park Battin Cage Nets dam and removed $ Re lace nets Replaced window and door Dec, 2001 Bad er Park Warming House Broken into $ 650.00 250.OQ Build Vandal Grates and access Jul 2002 Freeman Park Edd station broken into , July, 2002 Freeman Park Eddy station restroom damage $ $ 75.00 1 250.00 Repairs Replace bl ocks and install Plexiglas cvr July, 2002 Freeman Park Edd Station Glass Block Windows broke n , Au 2002 Freeman Park Eddy station restroom dama e $ 60.00 Repairs , Jan, 2003 Skate Park Fencin burned with biff $ 250.00 Rep lace fencin Replaced Slide $500 deductible Sept, 2003 Bad er Park Cur! Slide Burned $ 1,950.00 Ma y, 2004 Cathcart Park Fencing burned with biff $ $ 250.00 275.00 Replace fencin and shrubs June 2004 Cathcart Park Fencin and bushes burned with biff , July, 2004 Cathcart Park Fencing ainted with raffiti $ 75.00 aimed /stained Replaced $500.00 deductible Oct, 2004 Freeman Park Burned Tot Lot Crawl Tube $ 1 500.00 Rep laced $500.00 deductible Oct, 2004 Freeman Park Burned Tot Lot Crawl Tube $ 1,700.00 Freeman Park Field and Irrigation Damage vehicle $ 350.00 Re air field and irri ation system Oct, 2004 Feb, 2005 Freeman Park Broken bollards $ 200.00 Replace Park Painted Graffiti on Tennis Backboard $ 125.00 Repaint backboard April, 2005 Silverwood Rural System R Preventing and ControllingVand Page 1 of 8 0 Whether destroying a gate to a forest or farm road with a cutting torch is vandalism or not is not worth the debate. It is trespass and destruction of property. Vandalism includes these two actions as well as moving, defacing, or defiling property. Burning of particular kinds, sometimes called vandalism, can easily be seen as arson. Acts of vandalism include littering; looting archeological sites, opening valves on tanks; gathering firewood; destroying (debarking) trees; destroying equipment or its operation, such as t i + e v e o wi i� to r i alt rc boa . grapes, gasbag,, .,ar�J, to ilet' s, t ��a� s� „��e��, oa�. nr �. docks, picnic tables; shooting signs and trees; dumping wastes; discoloring water; and painting rocks; blocking roads and trails; using blocked roads (especially when soil is wet); and stealing traffic counters. An elaborate debate has arisen about whether spraycan paint on structures is art of vandalism (Chalfant 1992). The distinction between vandalism "for fun," "out of ignorance," or "for profit (or cost saving)" is probably important. Theft and game poaching are occasionally included within vandalism. Dumping garbage and construction waste problems increase, especially as a function of nearness to city and residential areas and as a function of dumping fees. The higher the fees, the greater the illegal dumping of wastes. In 1974, as an example, the costs of vandalism in the National Forests was $7 million. In 1956, an unseen type of vandalism emerged. It was that of the radical environmentalists who were said to be fed up with litigation and lobbying, and resorted to "dirty tricks" and guerrilla activity including: • sabotaging logging equipment • pulling survey stakes • putting spikes in trees (to destroy saw blades) w htt : / /fie.fw.vt.edu /rh iles /ARuralSystem/Vandalism.htmi ATTACHMENT G P g I:ural System • "jack-rocking" roads, using a special device to puncture tires • disrupting recreation (dressed as bears) plugging factory discharge pipes camping high in trees, daring loggers to cut the tree • releasing trapped animals • destroying billboards • disrupting hunts. Page 2 of 8 Part of the vandalism control strategy suggested within Rural System is to promote the concept that "vandalism" is much too inclusive an idea. Once adequate, the word now includes too many acts or events and thereby can slow or hamper cost - effective control efforts. The money spent on preventing dumping of urban building materials cannot effectively be spent if a major objective is controlling people who destroy forest road gates or set spite fires. We plan a committee action to name a reasonable group of major types of vandalism, then to direct action and limited funds to each type. This action, we believe, will then encourage reporting of successes in control by type. To reduce or control vandalism, a multi- faceted, simultaneous strategy is needed. The proposed approach is clearly systems oriented and starts with objectives. These need inspection and improvement but, as a starting place, the recommendations are: 4 0 To minimize vandalism events. 2. To minimize the conspicuousness of events. 3. To minimize the magnitude of an event. 4. To minimize the estimated financial loss (direct). 5. To minimize the estimated cost of cleanup or replacement of each event. 6. To minimize the estimated number of people negatively affected by any knowledge of the event. 7. To minimize total costs of a vandalism reduction system. These objectives usually provide a surprising diversity of strategies for action. Each needs to be weighted. (Assign 100 as the most important objective, then others a value relative to that.) The diversity results in part from continuing debate about what is vandalism and whether the roots are historical, psychological, sociological, or in some way stimulated by the environment itself (Moser 1992). The strategies we shall continue to study and implement as needs arise and funds become available: Open lands for hunting, fishing, and recreation, adding information on vandalism control to the ,, ttp:// fwle. fw. vt. edu/ rhglles /ARuralSystem/Vandalism.html Rural System information provided to permittees Provide opportunities for reporting vandalism Educate: (a) why not; (b) costs; (c) disease and disadvantages; (d) fire potential; instill awareness of the bad effects and responsibility for property Conduct tours, discussing costs of vandalism along with major topics,or entire tour to see cases of vandalism Have membership in the area user -group pay for costs of clean -up not otherwise met (thereby encouraging information and reporting of violations) Post boundary or ownership signs Conduct school poster and public - speaking contests Provide dumpster and disposal sites Promote recycling Encourage grinding and composting and /or a compost processing center Close roads on which cleanup is especially difficult Protect heavy equipment by fences or with other security Make regular reports of vandalism including cumulative reports and positive changes in the record. Be attuned to local, short -term dumping needs; provide options Page 3 of • I* http:// fwie. fw. vt. edu/ rhgiles /ARuralSysternNandalism.html Rural System 0 Encourage high cost timber- hauling permits (to liscourage timber trespass) 2onsider the "treble damage" law (Washington) that allows landowners to collect three times the ;ost of litigation, cleanup, damage, or restoration from apprehended law breakers Promote inclusion of dumping /clean -up information with all local building permits Encourage cooperative posting (pooling the limited resources of local governments, beautification committees, and others to control costs) Work with wildlife and other law enforcement staff Develop a vandalism study group and a sophisticated field research crew to identify violators Privide rifle range (as an option to random or vandal shooting) ploy cooperative security and deputies 0 Offer rewards Close land (which may have counter - intuitive results; open with a users' fee permit); open for a brief season Charge user fees that are invested in an "insurance policy" to pay for vandalism when it occurs Work with fire prevention and control system agencies Provide target practice area (reducing random shooting of signs and equipment) Page 4 of S /F ie f�t. vt. edu/ rhgiles /ARuralSystem/Vandalism.html Dural System Use sanction signs ( "off trail hikers may be fined ") versus ethical appeal ( "stay on paved trails and preserve the meadow ") (Johnson and Swearingen 1992) Place signs so as to reduce their destruction by shooters Prevent high - powered rifles from being carried near high -value equipment (like microwave disks and communication facilities) Clean up after social events or acts of vandalism immediately Set up a free telephone line for reporting illegal activities Seek protective legislation (legislation can have an educational effect) Include vandalism control as part of youth or adult membership rules or pledges Work with local governments for effective waste disposal (thus reducing illegal disposal on your area). Work on specific disposal problems such as large items (refrigerators and tires) and roofing shingles Offer low -cost waste pick -up Assure public reporting of convicted people. If punishment is a selected strategy, publicize it for its potential deterrence effect Report costs of repairs and cleanup to encourage people to report violators (and discourage some) Conduct seasonal patrols, after study of seasonal occurrence (vandalism, by type, is seasonal) Page 5 of u • • http:// fwle. fw. vt. edu/ rhgiles /ARuralSystem/Vandalism.html 1Zural System 0 Conduct daily patrols in recreation areas Display "presence" for deterrence Develop GIS maps of high - probability problem areas, then intensify patrols and posting in these areas (see Paine 1971) Get assistance from news media and editorial staff to present problems and solutions Improve construction :material to reduce ease of (vandalism or reduce costs Use alternative architectural or other designs Carve messages into large rocks as alternatives to Islgns prove site planning Study and implement relevant parts of the extensive literature on anti - littering behavior Post word that names of convicted violators will be published Block -off areas where it is easy-to- dump /costly -to- clean -up Share effective tactic and strategies with other Page 6 of 8 When there is property vandalism, the most common strategy used is to use more rigid building materials for signs, facilities, and structures. Theft and destruction of signs and gates is commonplace. Use 6 x 8 inch posts (not 4 x 4) or scrap railroad track rails. Use large eye bolts in hanging signs and pull the base of the eye deeply into the wood. After insertion, strip bolts of their threads and bend them over. Set signs in concrete and place a steel bar in the base of the signpost, perpendicular to the post to prevent it being easily W ce ted out. One person suggested placing a radio transmitter in a sign so that it can be d if stolen. (in some areas, the costs of losses are great.) In order to predict the future needs, we plan to develop a trend (regression) analysis and http:// fwie. fw. vt. edu/ rhgiles /ARuralSystem/Vandalism.html Rural System Page 7 of s seek to develop a predictive model for vandalism costs for the future. Studies about the behavior of vandals and how to prevent and control vandalism are underway. One observation is that repeat behavior at a site is common. Anger and frustration seem to be common associates of such behavior. Older, run -down facilities are most commonly vandalized suggesting the importance of continual upkeep of facilities. Vandalism is common on damaged buildings. Continual study of these results is planned. A functional relationship needs to be developed (a multiple regression) in which we have a sum of equations expressing each component of the objective: Sum W = f (posters, past reports, brochures, distance from town, dumping fees, pick -up service, dumpster service.... ) A performance measure is needed. Assume that one average (value 50) event per year is normal, natural, expected and beyond control. Events in excess of this amount (which can and should be changed after 3 years of study, perhaps to 0.3 per year) are the topic of control. Change in the sum of the weighted scores per 100 dollars is the measure of system effectiveness. The need is for a near -zero score at the lowest (non -zero) cost. The graph of this score will probably be negative over time (perhaps a negative logarithm). References 0 Once available: Managing Vandalism Parkman Center for Urban Affairs, 33 Beacon St., Boston MA 02108 Chalfant, H. 1992. No one is in control p. 3 -12 in H. H. Christensen, D. R. Johnson, and M. H. Brookes (eds) Vandalism: research, prevention, and social policy. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rpt. PNW- GTR -293, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon 277 pp. Christiansen, M. L. (N. D.) Vandalism control management for parks and recreation areas. Venture Publishing, Inc., 1640 Oxford Circle, State College, PA 16801. Christiansen, M. L. 1983. Vandalism Control Management for Parks and Recreation Areas. University Park, PA, The Pennsylvania State University. 123pp. Howley, Jack, Editor. 1981. Reducing Park Vandalism. Upper Plain State Innovation Group, Bismark, ND. 0 Fogel, I. 1981. Six Ways to Reduce Vandalism in Parks. Nations Cities Weekly. February 9: 7 -8 In Christiansen, M. L. 1983. Vandalism Control Management for Parks and http:// fwie. fw. vt. edu/ rhgiles /ARuralSystem/Vandalism.html kural System Page 8 of 8 Recreation Areas. University Park, PA, The Pennsylvania State University. 123pp. Jo nson, D. R. and T. C. Swearingen. 1992. The effectiveness of selected trail side sign t in deterring off -trail hiking at Paradise Meadow, Mount Rainer National Park, p. 103 -119 in H. H. Christensen, D. R. Johnson, and M. H. Brookes (eds) Vandalism: research, prevention, and social policy. USDA For. Serv. Gen Tech. Rpt. PNW- GTR -293, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland Oregon 277 pp. Munson, M. D. 1995. Crime in the forest: vandals at the gate. J. For. 93(3): 28- 30. Paine, L.A. 1971. Accident hazard evaluation and control decisions on forested recreation sites. U.S.D.A. Forest Service Research Paper PSW -68, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Exp. Sta., Berkeley, CA. 10 pp. Thayer, R. E., F. W. Wagner, and K. B. Coleman. 1981. Vandalism The Menace to Leisure Resources in the 198015. National Recreation and Park Association, Arlington, VA. See the Michigan clean forest group site for ideas. Horne .............. _.... _ _. _.... _.. . September 14, 2004 0 hap '/ fwie. fw. vt. ed�,, rhgiles /ARuralSystem/Vandalism.html CITY OF SHOREWOOD 7:00 AM WATER INTO COFFEE PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION TUESDAY, JUNE 28, 2005 • MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION b l� 4a The Park Commission began its discussion at 7:00 a.m. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Davis; Commissioners Farniok, Young, Westerlund, and Moonen; and City Engineer Brown Absent: Commissioner Wagner was absent 2. MANOR PARK IMPROVEMENTS; POND CLEAN -UP, SHORELINE PLANTING, BALL FIELD IMPROVEMENTS, OTHER; LAKE MINNEWASHTA DOG PARK PARTNERSHIP; OTHERS AS SUGGESTED BY COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF Chair Davis stated that the Foundation would be hosting a second fundraising breakfast slated for September. She indicated that the Foundation had expressed interest in participating in a `natural' project. While the Freeman wetland project estimated at $400,000 might be a bit high for the Foundation, the Manor Park pond project might be of interest. Chair Davis noted that Commissioner Wagner had suggested proposing a security project for the Foundation to partner with the City on. In addition, the Foundation had expressed interest in raising funds for the regional dog park, or one member suggested rebuilding Manor Park's ball field to accommodate Babe Ruth teams. Young stated that, in his opinion, Manor Park ball field should remain the neighborhood park, as opposed to a larger recreational baseball facility. Westerlund concurred; stating that she would vehemently oppose any move to enlarge the baseball fields, pointing out that the parking would not accommodate such a move. Chair Davis encouraged the Commission to brain storm additional ideas or suggestions of what it would like seen done in the parks, in order to give the Foundation a focus for their breakfast fundraiser. Young stated that the Commission has had a number of projects it's spent a great deal of time on, most significantly the Freeman Park wetland project, which he suggested be broken down into phases or pieces for the Foundation to participate in. He maintained that the regional dog park had a great deal of enthusiasm and support with or without the Foundations participation and he would not like to see them spend a great deal of energy or time on the project. Westerlund agreed that it would be easy for the Foundation to be the vehicle to which funds are raised for the dog park if they did not have to expend all of their energies on it alone. Westerlund pointed out that the Freeman Park wetland project might qualify for numerous grants or other • funding sources. Westerlund noted that if she could get a copy of the plans to share with MnDOT and other organizations she might be able to investigate funding opportunities. Farmok questioned whether the Foundation would find it more desirable to participate in a portion of a large scale project or several smaller scale projects. PARK COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003 PAGE 2OF2 Brown stated that the City has a very good feasibility study for the Freeman wetland project that he could share with the Commission at their next meeting. He pointed out that Planning Commissioner Cathy White has expressed interest in performing the public education piece regarding buckthorn removal and would host a buckthorn removal effort for Freeman Park in late October or early November. As part of her training for master gardening, Chair Davis stated that White could accomplish a removal effort with the support of a good public relations campaign. Based on White's suggestion to assemble a few groups 25 for the project, Brown stated that the City could purchase a couple of weed wrenches for the program. He further encouraged the removal to take place as a preliminary step towards completing the wetland project. While this would certainly be a worthwhile endeavor, Chair Davis noted that the Foundation expressed a desire to participate in a project outside of Freeman Park, such as the Manor Pond project. Passing around a rough memo outlining the expenditure of $176.00, Westerlund stated that she had begun the water quality analysis of Manor Pond. She pointed out that the plantings near the waters edge would be in addition to the estimate, but necessary as the geese problem poses a public health hazard. Young suggested mentioning this project to the Foundation as a small scale effort in water quality and education. Brown urged Westerlund to choose plantings that require little maintenance, as there is not a • master gardener on staff. Westerlund felt that a 3 year commitment on behalf of neighborhood volunteers would result in a self maintaining area and suggested staff contact a consultant to lay out a plan. Brown stated that once the Commission reviewed the Freeman wetland project, they might be surprised at the many facets of involvement for the Foundation, be it kiosks, an overlook area, or restoration. Westerlund also suggested looking into an erosion control plan for the Silverwood Park sliding hill. On a separate note, Westerlund pointed out that the Music in the Park series featuring Ms Catherine was a phenomenal success. Based on this success, she suggested the Commission consider expanding the program for next year and asking for Foundation support. She thought that a kid's or family friendly series rotating between Shorewood parks might be an attractive opportunity for the Commission and Foundation. Young agreed that many residents might like the idea of a rotating parks program as a service that serves citizens in all areas of Shorewood. Brown reported that the new Skate Park equipment had arrived and the quality was fantastic in comparison to the past pieces. He pointed out that the replacement of the existing skate park equipment or creating an area for adults to relax while watching their children might be another • option for the Foundation to support. Brown stated that, in fact, the City had recently extended water service to the Skate Park and a fountain would be a nice addition to the park. Westerlund reported that the Silverwood playground slide had a large crack in it and needed to be replaced. PARK COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003 PAGE 3 OF 2 In summary, Chair Davis stated that the opportunities that she would be presenting to the Foundation included; participation in a component of the long range water project at Freeman Park, a shorter term Manor Park pond project encompassing a water quality and health issue, Skate Park water fountain and adult friendly plaza area, and/or expansion of the Music in the Park series to additional family friendly events. 2. ADJOURNMENT The Commission adjourned their meeting at 8:15 a.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Kristi B. Anderson Recording Secretary 0 0