Loading...
081004 PK AgP I"40 y 4TY OF SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION MEETING 'TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 2004 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY HALL 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING A. Roll Call Davis Gilbertson Meyer Youn Farniok Westerlund • B. Review Agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of July 13, 2004(Att. -#2A Draft Summary) B. Park Commission Work Session Meeting Minutes of July 27, 2004 (Att.42B Draft Summary) 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 4. REPORTS A. Report on City Council Meeting of August 9, 2004 B. Community Rec. Resources Second Quarter Report (Att.44B) 5. SOUTH TONKA LITTLE LEAGUE PROPOSAL FOR FIELD IMPROVEMENTS TO FREEMAN PARK (STLL Representative, Tim Beduhn)(Att. #5) 6. FREEMAN PARK PLAZA PLAN FOR LANDSCAPE AND PICNIC TABLES (Att. #6) 7. REVIEW AND APPROVE REVISIONS TO POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR RECOGNIZING DONATIONS TO THE PARKS (Att. #7) 8. DISCUSS GOALS, PRIORITIES AND WORK PROGRAM (Att. #8) 9. DETERMINE INVOLVEMENT WITH MN REC AND THE COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 10. DISCUSS SIGNS FOR THE PARK (Att. -#10) 11. DETERMINE PARK LIAISON FOR SEPTEMBER 12. NEW BUSINESS Council Liaison: August: Westerlund 13. ADJOURNMENT September: . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD FARK COMMISSION MEETING CITY HALL TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 7:00 P.M. • MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING` Chair Arnst called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Davis; Commissioners Young, Meyer, Gilbertson, Farniok, and Westerlund. City Engineer Brown; Technician Bailey; and City Administrator Dawson Absent: City Council liaison Lizee B. Review Agenda Westerlund moved, Gilbertson seconded, to approve the Agenda as submitted. Motion passed 6/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of June 8, 2004 Page 3, Item #6C, line 3, "first series" was changed to "first event" Farniok moved, Meyer seconded, Approving the Park Commission Meeting Minutes of June 8, 2004. Motion passed 6/0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were none. 4. PRESENTATION BY BOY SCOUT LUKE SCHLANGEN South Tonka Little League representative, Tim Beduhn, stood up and asked to discuss several requests by Little League, including turf in the batting cages, installation of a new scoreboard, and resodding and leveling of field 3. As STLL did not appear on the evening's agenda as discussion items, Brown suggested that Beduhn contact him to discuss their proposals and appear before the Commission next month. Luke Schlangen explained that he wished to lay a path between fields 1 and 2 at Freeman Park as part of an Eagle Scout project he was striving to achieve. He stated that the path would be funded by private sponsors and that the STLL Board would help him with the actual sodding and installation of the path. • While he saw merit in the project, Brown stated that one complication may delay Luke's intent, and this was the potential drain system in the area between fields 1 and 2. He explained that the drain system has been a hotly discussed issue of late and that the City is investigating its options regarding a drain system in this area. Brown continued, stating that since the water main was extended thru this area, the City has tried repeatedly to re- establish grass, with little success. I I PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 PAGE 2 OF 9 Although the City Consultant is currently determining what type of system can be installed, he • believed the project would have to be delayed until after the drainage was resolved. Young asked Luke what timeline he had established to complete his project. Though he has until his 18`" birthday to complete his Eagle Scout project, Luke stated that he had intended to complete the path after fall ball, sometime this year, and had no other project plans. If he was solely committed to this project, Westerlund urged Luke to work in coordination with the City as to when to lay the path. She indicated that she would hate to see him given the go ahead to complete the project this fall, only for the City to rip up his work next spring with the installation of a drain system. While he hoped the drainage issues would be resolved this year, Brown indicated that there were no guarantees of when the improvements would be made. Gilbertson pointed out that the civic process could enhance and be part of Luke's Eagle Scout proj ect. Young asked if the City could approve the scout project in concept and revisit the plan later this year once progress has been made regarding the drainage. Brown stated that it would be beneficial to have direction from the Park Commission and continue ongoing communications via STLL as to the progress of the drainage system. Brown • indicated that the City would be hosting a public meeting August 4 to discuss drainage issues in general throughout the City. He suggested that Luke stay in contact with Twila Grout, Park Secretary, for progress reports. Gilbertson moved, Farniok seconded, approving the pathway project between fields 1 and 2 at Freeman Park in concept, and encouraging Luke Schlangen to stay in contact with the City in order to receive continued progress reports and establish a timeline for -the Eagle Scout Project. Motion passed 6/0. REPORTS A. Report on City Council Meeting of June 14, and June 28, 2004 Brown reported that the City Council acknowledged the Music in the Park series at their recent meeting. B. Report on Joint Meeting With City Council, Park Foundation of June 14, 2004 Gilbertson reported that the potential donor for the Park Plaza project was present at the Foundation meeting and stated that, though he'd like to see the plaza completed this year, he would still support the project if completed in 2005. • Ken Dallman, President of the Shorewood Park Foundation, reported that the joint meeting allowed the Foundation, Commission, and Council to discuss some issues that would enable the groups to move forward on some projects. He stated that, while the discussion came down to determining a PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 PAGE 3 OF 9 • policy for naming and recognizing donors, the Foundation would like to see the plaza project completed this year while it is still fresh in everyone's minds. B. Update on Meeting with Tim Hughes Regarding New Piece of Equipment for Skate Park Brown reported that Hughes, who was current on new regulations regarding skate park heights, indicated that the underwriters have given clearance for 4' high quarter pipes as apposed to the 3' high initial rail. Since the skate light surfaces have deteriorated as well, Brown stated that Hughes and staff will break down the costs for a new 4' high quarter pipe and surface sheets for an upcoming Park Commission meeting. Young questioned what fund these repairs and upgrades would be deducted from and whether these were viewed as priorities by the Commission. Brown stated that the improvements were part of the capital improvement plan (CIP), with $8,000 slated for the skate park. D. Update on Park Activity Maps • As part of the Master Planning document, Brown reported that the Commission had directed staff to develop a park inventory utilizing aerial photos of the parks. While these photos provide a good basis to work from with the corresponding acreages noted, Brown asked for Commissioner comment. Dais asked what the next step would be. Brown stated that staff would return to WSB with the Commissions comments and have them further identify the 4 categories of open space as defined by the Commission in previous meetings. At that point, Brown stated that the documents would be complete and incorporated into the Master Plan. Westerlund suggested that WSB identify the amount of impervious surface each park contains as part of their calculations, which would include parking lot, tennis courts, basketball courts, etc. Brown requested that the Commissioners forward additional comments to him within 1 -2 weeks. 6. PRESENTATION BY CARVER COUNTY PARKS A. Lake Minnewashta Regional Park Off Leash Dog Park Lenny Schmitz, of Carver County Parks, stated that he wished to gauge support from local cities for an off leash dog park in Lake Minnewashta Regional Park. It would be the Counties intent to set up a • partnership with Shorewood, Excelsior, Chaska, Chanhassen, and Victoria to fund the project, since there are no off leash dog parks in the vicinity and the public would like to have that amenity. He noted that funding is the biggest obstacle, since the County has dedicated it's funding in recent years to land acquisition. He asked if there was interest within the Commission to pursue a partnership with the County and other local communities. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 PAGE 4 OF 9 a Davis asked how many acres the park would consist of, as well as, an estimated price tag. • Schmitz stated that the cost would range anywhere from $20,000 - 40,000 and the size from 15 to 20 acres. Since there is 15 -20 acres available in the northeast corner of the park with a separate entrance and parking area, staff felt this would be an ideal location for the dog park. Schmitz explained that no concrete plans were in place yet and that he was in the initial phases of gauging support for the project. In addition to city funding, Schmitz stated that fund raising by pet owners was another avenue worth pursuing, since the park would be a regional facility available to numerous potential users. Davis asked if additional user fees would be put in place. Schmitz believed a season pass or daily use fee would be required to use the park, but cautioned that little enforcement is available, thus, making this difficult to enforce. Gilbertson asked who would be responsible for ongoing maintenance costs. Schmitz stated that ongoing maintenance would be absorbed by the County. He indicated that he wished to obtain a commitment of $5,000- 10,000 per community which would then enable the County to have site plans and concept designs put together. Schmitz stated that he had met with Victoria, and would be meeting with the other cities in the coming weeks. He stated that the City of Chanhassen has been eager to see the development of the off leash park, especially since they don't • allow pets in their parks at all. Davis commented that BARK Magazine voted the Minneapolis area as a dog friendly City. She stated that she believed this would be a great use of that unused portion of the park and a great place for pet owners to visit. While this portion of the park is blanketed with a combination of open space, maples, oaks, basswoods, and exotics, Westerlund voiced her opposition of removing much of the canopy beyond the exotics. Davis asked what Schmitz wanted from the Commission this evening. Schmitz stated that he would like to know if the Commission is interested in joining a partnership and seeing what can be developed. Brown stated that dogs in parks and related issues have been difficult burdens for cities to carry. In addition, Shorewood and it's neighboring communities are strapped for space; therefore, if the Park Commission wishes to pursue the dog park, this would be an excellent opportunity. He asked if the Commission was prepared to make a financial commitment, knowing the dollars are available in the CIP. Administrator Dawson interjected, stating that the Commission could proceed to explore the • alternatives. He asked what the level of contribution would be based on, a standard number of dogs or a certain dollar amount per community. Dawson recommended that the County consider some type of proportionate amount for each prospective partner, based on the size of the community. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 PAGE 5 OF 9 • Schmitz stated that the County would not wish to turn away any partner that wished to contribute on some level. Davis stated that she was confident that the Commission was amenable to the partnership and asked what the proposed timeline for the project was. Schmitz indicated that the project would be slated for fall of 2005 or spring of 2006. He promised to follow -up with Shorewood after his upcoming meetings with the other prospective partners and keep the City abreast of any developments. Brown introduced Mark Themig, Shorewood resident, past Park Commissioner, and interested pet owner. Themig stated that he and several of his neighbors were excited about the off leash dog park and believed it would be a great asset to the community. Gilbertson asked how dog owners could help forward this mission. Brown suggested information and updates be published in the newsletter and website, as well as, requests for comment and feedback. • 7. MUSIC IN THE PARK Davis reported that the Music in the Park the past weekend was a wonderful community event with more than 200 people in attendance. She asked if there had been any sponsor feedback to date and indicated that she supported written recognition of the sponsors via the sample certificate. Brown suggested the Mayor sign the certificate and the saxophone logo be added to the form. Gilbertson moved, Westerlund seconded, to approve the certificate of Appreciation and letter thanking each sponsor `for its support of the 1 St Annual City of Shorewood Music in the Park' signed by the Mayor in recognition of their participation. Motion passed 6/0. Gilbertson requested that each newspaper ad mention the sponsors individually and asked that he be given PDF approval before the ads run. In addition, Gilbertson asked that the donations be allocated accordingly, since the first event was rained out. Since rainouts are inevitable, Brown suggested that future sponsors sponsor the entire series of all three concerts versus specific events. He noted that Pizza Primo, sponsor of the first concert which was rained out, was given sponsorship of the second concert. • Farniok suggested that the Commission address this in further detail next year. Meyer urged staff to bill each sponsor for the entire series and if they have a question, she felt confident that they would call the City to discuss the details. r PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 PAGE 6 OF 9 8. REVIEW DESIGN OF FREEMAN PARK PLAZA PROJECT • Having met with members of the Park Foundation on site, Brown presented the updated Park Plaza rendering, noting that the fence would be eliminated. He pointed out that materials would need to meet certain specifications and that the plaza was rotated from the original design so that the playground is situated to the north. Westerlund asked where the additional 4 trees would be placed. Gordon Lindstrom, Park Foundation member, stated that the trees would be planted to the south and west side of the plaza to aid in shading the site. Brown explained that, at one time, the Pak Commission granted its general approval, and technically, staff is comfortable with the aspects of the plan. Young moved, Gilbertson seconded, granting Park Commission endorsement to the Plaza design for City Council consideration. Meyer questioned who would be responsible for paying the bills for the plazas construction. Brown stated that the Park Foundation would be funding this endeavor. Lindstrom and Dallman confirmed this. Young stated that he wished to pass the responsibilities of choosing stone and materials on • staff. Brown encouraged the Commission to determine whether the plaza fit the Commissions vision, or discuss any strong desires that they'd like to see incorporated into it, and move it forward to Council Dawson encouraged the Commission to be as detailed as they like, since the City will be responsible for maintaining the plaza once built. Meyer indicated her desire that the Commission be kept in the loop as materials and landscaping are determined. Dawson invited members of the Commission to attend any of the monthly Foundation meetings to get updates or voice preferences. Brown stated that staff would commit to bringing back surface materials, plantings, treatments, picnic tables, etc. for the Commissions information. Dallman felt it would not be difficult to share planting diagrams with the Commission ahead of time. He asked the Commission to grant approval for the plaza where it is shown so that the Foundation can proceed to obtain quotes and finalize plans, and the donor can begin to obtain funds. Davis indicated that she'd like to see the fundraising cover and include the trees, plants, • landscaping, and picnic tables from the beginning. Young suggested this be incorporated into the resolution. He withdrew his original motion. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 PAGE 7 OF 9 • Since eliminating the brick program, Dallman pointed out that the plaza, once surrounded by the bricks, would now be a concrete patio with a colored stamped edge design. Brown reiterated that approvals this evening would allow the Foundation to proceed with their fundraising, obtaining bids, plantings, and surface treatments that could be presented to the Commission in August. Dallman pointed out that the donor would like the plaza to be a fitting memorial to a respected and deceased resident; therefore, it would be their intent to have a nice looking plaza. Meyer repeated the need to require landscaping in order to beautify this huge piece of cement. Gilbertson added his request to see picnic tables also. He pointed out that the Commission has voiced overall support for the placement of the plaza; however, would like to see more details of how the finished product will look. Lindstrom stated that the donor was present this evening and forced to leave, but voiced his request that the plaza project be allowed to move forward for completion this year, preferably by October. He questioned whether this was possible. Based on her and Commission Young's meeting with Frank Molek of the Arboretum, Davis stated that it is the families of those memorialized that wish to see these things maintained and kept very nice. It is the cities intent that these memorials be a beautiful spot and something • everyone can be proud of; therefore, more attention to the details is necessary. Gilbertson moved to approve the Plaza project design with the caveat that the Park Commission be allowed to review the final materials, treatments, surfaces, picnic tables, and landscaping. Gilbertson stated that he did not think the Commission's need to see the plaza details would stop the process from proceeding, but instead help shape its development. Dallman stated that the Foundation could return in August to present the landscape plan and other details if the Commission could support the concept. Gilbertson withdrew his motion. Gilbertson moved, Westerlund seconded, to approve the family plaza area, contingent upon City Engineer approval of details and materials and the Park Commission approval of the landscape plan and picnic tables at its next meeting; noting that the Commission endorses the overall plaza's placement, spirit of this endeavor, and wishes to foster its continued progress. While Young stated that he would vote in support of the motion, he was concerned by the Commissions need to micromanage this particular project. is Motion passed 6/0. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 PAGE 8 OF 9 9. DISCUSS POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR RECOGNIZING DONATIONS TO THE PARKS 0 Dallman explained that, in the case of the plaza, the intent is that it would be named as a fitting memorial of someone who held significance to many in Shorewood Oaks. He maintained that the recognition would not be precedent setting, since the Shirley Rice Memorial Garden and other namesakes currently exist within the City. He pointed out that the American Legion currently supports the Southshore Community Park each year and is recognized via signage. He stated that the donor has indicated his willingness to maintain tastefulness by signifying the plaza with a small plaque or stone. Brown pointed out that Administrator Dawson had done a great deal of research compiling samples from other cities of their policies and procedures for recognizing donors and contributors to their parks. While the responses and procedures of communities varied across the board, Dawson indicated that the Eagan model provided the most comprehensive approach, with the addition of some sensitive issues regarding signage, recognition in public information, corporate recognition, and the criteria pertaining to living or deceased. Davis was hesitant to agree that, as noted within some of the city policies, if a donor has covered 50% or more of the costs they are entitled to naming rights. On the other hand, she believed a small sign would be appropriate in recognition .of the contribution. Davis stated that she felt this • issue could not be resolved this evening, and instead would be better suited for a work session in order to set standards for the future. Young asked what this plaza contributor would be comfortable with regarding recognition. Dallman stated that the donor had indicated that a brick or stone with a plaque dedicated to the gentleman's memory would be appropriate. Dallman stated that the donor was not looking for anything big or pretentious. Brown suggested that, since the intent of the donor seems reasonable and the Commission seems comfortable with some sort of recognition, the Foundation could return in August detailing the recognition. This would allow the Foundation to move forward while the Commission sets up its guidelines. Meyer stated that she was not comfortable naming the entire plaza after someone and feared it might be deemed precedent setting. She agreed that more time should be spent in work session setting standards for recognition. Gilbertson asked if the plaza proposal fit the parameters set up by the Eagan guidelines. Dawson stated that the Eagan policy would allow that some special recognition would be given. While it would fit within the parameters, the Commission would need to determine the intent of the naming, for instance this plaza is in memory of `someone'. Dallman stated that he would relay to the donor that the Commission is comfortable with a • modest dedication, and that in all likelihood the Commission will not reverse itself during the process. While the donor does not wish to go to the family until he knows for sure what type of dedication would be allowed, if the Foundation felt confident this would proceed with the dedication. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY l3, 2004 PAGE 9 OF 9 • Young stated that he believed that there was consensus among the Commission to give the Foundation a motion that the Commission has no problem with the idea of a memorial or recognition, but it's a matter of defining the specifics of it. Westerlund moved, Young seconded, that the Commission make a commitment to allow some sort of recognition to be given for this gentleman in this particular plaza in question, with further details forthcoming, that will fit within the standards that the Commission set forth. Motion passed 6/0. Dallman thanked the Commission for its attention to this matter and hoped that the standards would be set at a work session prior to the next regular meeting in August. The work session was scheduled for July 27, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. 10. NOMINATE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Westerlund moved, Gilbertson seconded, to nominate Davis as Chair of the Park Commission, Motion passed 6/0. Meyer moved, Westerlund seconded, to nominate Gilbertson as Vice -Chair of the Park Commission. Motion passed 6/0. • 11. RESCHEDULE SEPTEMBER 14 PARK COMMISSION MEETING The September meeting was rescheduled for September 28, 2004. 12. NEW BUSINESS Brown distributed a liaison sign up sheet for Council meetings for the remainder of the year. Farniok would liaison at the July City Council meeting. The Park Foundation would be meeting Wednesday, July 14, 2004 at 5:00 p.m. for those who might be available to attend. 13. ADJOURNMENT Meyer moved, Westerlund seconded, adjourning the Regular Park Commission Meeting of July 13, 2004, at 9:55 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Kristi B. Anderson Recording Secretary • CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION CITY HALL TUESDAY, JULY 27, 2004 6:00 P.M. MINUTES VA womm COMMISSION WORK SESSION MEETING 1. CONVENE PARK *A I Chair Davis convened the work session meeting at 6:00 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Davis; Commissioners Farniok, Meyer, and Westerlund. City Engineer Brown; Technician Bailey; City Administrator Dawson, and late arrival City Council liaison Zerby Absent: Commissioners Young and Gilbertson B. Review Agenda Item 2.5 Work Program discussion was added to the agenda. 2. DISCUSS POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR RECOGNIZING DONATIONS TO THE PARKS Dawson presented a draft Donor Recognition Policy modeled after the Eagan policy for • review. He indicated that the City had expressed interest in developing policy and procedures that set a standard to follow or refer to on a case by case basis. Although she appreciated the revisions to the policy as suggested by staff, Davis stated that she was uncomfortable with naming rights being given to donors. She also suggested that donors be given a list of approved benches or trees to choose from when they wish to donate these items. The Commission reviewed the Donor Policy on a page by page basis making numerous revisions to the document. Page one revisions consisted of renaming the document to a Donor Policy, followed by section one to Donor Recognition. Other minor wording modifications were made. The Naming Section was removed from page one, as were subsections throughout the document which referred specifically to `naming' including page 2(c), page 2(b) under Proposals, and page 4(a), (b), (d), and (h). Throughout the remaining document the term `naming' was changed to `recognition'. Page 3 -4, under Requirements, the Commission deleted (a), (b), and (e), as well as, made minor revisions to letters (c) and (d). Page 5, under method of payment item (a) was revised and (c) was removed. Meyer uestioned whether it was appropriate to name eve everything within Freeman Park. Y questioned � g She believed a recognition plaque should suffice in place of naming. Davis concurred. Brown stated that it would be appropriate to set up guidelines for recognition and allow certain parameters based on the size of donations. He acknowledged that the Commission PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 27, 2004 PAGE 2 OF 4 could develop a policy stating that they were not in favor of naming particular improvements, but would find official recognition acceptable via a plaque or marker. Westerlund questioned whether the Commission should shut out the option of naming something altogether. Brown pointed out that, whatever policy the Commission develops it will be challenged; therefore, he encouraged the Commission to make the policy as tight as possible and void of subjectivity. Dawson asked at what point the Commission would feel comfortable offering naming privileges. Brown cautioned the Commission from setting too high a threshold so that only the wealthiest retailers etc. would be able to afford naming opportunities. On the other hand, Brown pointed out that an asphalt company had volunteered to donate materials to construct a trail at Freeman Park. Brown asked how to recognize this contribution. Davis felt a plaque thanking him for his contribution was appropriate, but not naming rights. If the policy is that the City would not accept gifts with naming rights attached, Dawson asked how substantial gifts might be treated, or if they would only be given recognition. Meyer maintained that she would prefer the focus be kept on donor recognition alone. Zerby arrived at 6:53 P.M. Brown explained that the ultimate goal would be to compile a `donation/gift' book for potential donors to choose from, i.e. a set standard of trees, furniture, plaques, etc. In addition, Brown stated that the donor agreement would need to be tweaked to cover certain circumstances. Under the Method of Payment section, Brown asked how the Commission felt about long term pledges. He asked at what point the City might consider severing the relationship with a donor working on raising pledges, for example 2 -5 years. If the City does not want financial liability, Westerlund suggested the recognition portion of the donation be approved once the donor has obtained their pledges. Davis believed setting a shorter time limit would force the group to make a decision. She asked whether the group should be allowed to begin digging before they've raised and submitted their pledges within the 2 yr time limit. Brown urged the Commission to obtain financial assurity or that financial pledges be fulfilled prior to the groundbreaking. Famiok indicated that she would wish to be given some direction from the City's financial department on this matter. 1 1 ' , PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 27, 2004 PAGE 3 OF 4 • Method of Payment (a) was revised as follows: Financial assurity or cash escrow for the full amount of the donation shall be submitted to the City prior to the commencement of the construction. Under (b) and (d), Brown deferred to the opinion of the City Attorney. Brown asked whether the City would consider allowing naming under a certain set of criteria or not. Westerlund stated that she would not wish to miss out on a donor opportunity due to naming restrictions. By leaving the naming section out of the policy, Westerlund asked whether this provided the Commission with the opportunity to consider naming on a case by case basis. Davis cautioned that the typical corporate entity does not name for the good of the community; however, acquiesced that she might consider naming privileges for substantial gifts. - Brown indicated that, without established policy to stand on, the City would be making decisions based solely on subjectivity. Brown asked what might happen if the City was given a donation of land to be turned into a park. Dawson asked whether the Commission would prefer to accept donations and refer the donor to the recognition policy. Brown asked if the Commission meant to establish a position that they will not consider names at all. While Davis and Meyer both agreed, Davis felt that an offer of land for a new potential park might provide a unique opportunity. Meyer asked whether staff was comfortable with not naming donations. Brown indicated that staff would be comfortable with the decision if standards were put in place that the City Council could enforce. Brown stated that, in fact, everyone has the right to appeal any policy to the City Council. While it is difficult to override a policy, Zerby stated that the Council often reviews a policy to see if it works. In addition, the Council must approve any policy sent forth by the Park Commission before they take effect. Westerlund suggested that naming privileges be considered under certain scenarios and that the Commission identify those unique circumstances. Farniok concurred, stating that she was not opposed to naming something for an outstanding donation; however, commented that $20,000 was not considered outstanding in her mind. Davis suggested the policy reflect the sentiment that, while the City discourages the naming of gifts and donations, under certain circumstances, such as a significant donation PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 27, 2004 PAGE 4 OF 4 of land or outstanding financial contribution towards new facilities, naming should be considered. Davis opposed naming things within an existing park. Famiok pointed out that the term outstanding gift might need to be defined to a set value, for example, $200,000 or more. While outstanding to some may not be to others, Meyer stated that, in her mind, a new piece of land for park use would warrant naming. Westerlund reiterated that the policy should reflect the Commission's position about naming, as well as, define the differences between recognition and naming. She, too, was open to naming something that was a new addition to the existing park system versus adding an amenity to a current park. Brown summarized the Commissions position, noting that the City would prefer not to name facilities; however, outstanding donations made outside the geographic confines of the existing park system might be considered for naming. He reminded the Commission that the pressure is on to establish a policy on recognition and naming and asked whether more discussion was necessary. Davis asked staff to write up the changes discussed this evening and present them at the next Commission meeting for approval. Brown promised to email a revised draft to the Commissioners and add this item to the August I 01 agenda. In the meantime, he asked the Commissioners to contact Park Secretary Grout with any concerns or additions that come to mind after they review the draft. 2.5 WORK PROGRAM Brown encouraged the Commission to think about the goals and priorities discussed in the past as staff strives to assemble a 12 month work plan for discussion at the next regular meeting. Davis shared her work list containing approximately 12 items, many of which she noted had been addressed. 3. ADJOURNMENT The Work Session adjourned at 9:10 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Kristi B. Anderson Recording Secretary • • • • community rec. resources Date: 6/31/04 To: Larry Brown, Park Commission, Honorable Mayor, and City Council CC: Administrator Dawson From: Kristi Anderson and Sally Keefe RE: 2004 Second Quarter Report from Community Rec. Resources Attached is the report of activities from Community Rec. Resources summarizing activities and challenges in its role as Park Coordinator for the City of Shorewood for the second quarter of 2004. Organized sporting activity continues to be the highest use for City Parks each year. Monitoring and communication between City Staff, CRR, and Sports organizations provided the highlights for the season. CRR suggests consideration be given to clearly stating expectations and enforcement of policy . related to timeliness of document and fee submission. Should you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact Community Rec. Resources principals, Kristi Anderson or Sally Keefe. We continue to appreciate the support of City Staff and Council in this position as we work through the seasonal park usage process. Kristi Anderson and Sally Keefe Community Rec. Resources • community rec. resources • Date: 6/31/2004 To: Larry Brown, Park Commission, Honorable Mayor, and City Council CC: Administrator Dawson From: Kristi Anderson and Sally Keefe „Community Rec. Resources RE: Quarterly Report of activities from April 1, 2004 to June 31, 2004 Constant communication would be the best way to describe the activities of Community Rec. Resources for the second quarter of the year. The spring sporting season got underway, despite the wet weather, and should be wrapping up in mid - July. The bulk of time was devoted to communication efforts between sports organizations, City Staff, and CRR. While it was one of the intended goals of CRR for the year, increased communication • with sports organizations was afforded due to the inclement weather. There were three instances of field cancellations for the season as determined by CRR in concurrence with City Staff. These instances were based on monitoring visits to Freeman Park and cancellations were distributed through access to the City's website. CRR also provided direct email notification to the sports organizations of these cancellations. The sports organizations expressed appreciation for CRR's efforts to make direct contact regarding cancellation notification, and rescheduling of missed games did not pose a problem for the schedule. All parties utilizing the field space were following scheduled time blocks for usage, however, start and end times will continue to be an issue of compliance as CRR was told it is difficult for most organized users to be present on the fields prior to 5:30 P.M. The cancellation of the initial Friday night field time for the Music in the Park series was considered a "non- issue” since the Park Equity policy had clearly defined usage priorities. Once again, the City is to be commended for having this document in place to avoid conflicts and subjectivity in determining field use. With regard to weather - related field cancellations, it is the intent of CRR to work with City Staff to determine an enhanced process for field cancellation and communication of that cancellation process prior to the 2005 Spring Sporting season. CRR will then communicate with sports organization representatives to ensure specific criteria are clear regarding the necessity for safety of park users, as well as continuity of field quality. • At the end of the first quarter, CRR was . awaiting complete documentation from Southshore Softball Association (SSSA) due to the organizational timeline of collection. CRR still awaits final submission of rosters, and once received, will continue to work with SSSA regarding requested revised user fee monies submitted to the City. This particular organization continues to pose unique challenges due to their internal organizational timeline for collection of documentation. As you are aware, CRR informed this organization of the deadline for user fee collection. CRR also notified SSSA that no exceptions for release of schedule would be made prior to having full payment of user fees for each organization for field use in 2005. CRR looks to the City to support full implementation of this policy directive in the upcoming year for all sports organizations. This should not be surprising to any organization as notification has been given verbally at each mandatory seasonal sports organization information meeting. While this policy directive is implied in the Park Priority Policies document, specific verbiage providing explanation of this issue might be warranted in the policy document itself. Also, consideration should be given by City Staff regarding the process for communication and collection of documentation for sports organizations that are unable, or refuse, to attend the mandatory sports organization information meetings. While this issue is clearly defined in the Park Priority Policies document as resulting in loss of dedicated field time for the season, CRR would again look to the City to support enforcement of this issue for the 2005 Spring Sporting Season. CRR Staff has discussed the matter and is prepared to suggest a process believed to help mitigate and enforce this issue. • The Fall Sports Information meeting was held on June 21, 2004, with low attendance. Documentation continues to be received and final schedules are to be released mid - July for Lake Minnetonka Football Association, Tonka Babe Ruth, and STLL. CRR Staff had the pleasure of working with Southshore Senior Community Center Director Joyce Flurry and Scheduling Assistant Joann Kovorn regarding parking issues and scheduling conflicts for the upcoming Fall Sporting Season, specifically use of Badger Park. At this time, the Football Association is requesting field use on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. For this reason, Council and Commissions are strongly encouraged to carpool or park offsite on these evenings. The Southshore Center was unaware of any dates of conflict at this point in time, however, notification would be given to CRR should any conflicts in scheduling occur. Also a request for appropriate respectful parking was relayed to TFA at the Fall Information meeting and received well. Monitoring provided many insights into full seasonal spring use with the bulk of the monitoring again taking place at Freeman Park. Weather related cancellations posed the biggest frustration to users. Passive use was observed along the trail frequently by area seniors presumably residing nearby. The play areas were consistently in use during each evening monitoring event. Also during the course of the Spring Season, CRR Staff had the delightful pleasure of meeting Steve Qualle, concessionaire for • Eddy Station, who reported park users appreciated the concession stand being open during sporting events. 2 With regard to passive use at Freeman Park, the following incident relayed a good testament to the need for continued onsite monitoring and communication. One evening while monitoring at Freeman Park, CRR Staff spoke with a park user who stated he appreciated being able to park in the south parking lot and walk along the beautiful pathway to the north end of the park for soccer use! While CRR anticipates a quieter schedule for the fall, increased monitoring and communication will continue for the upcoming seasonal use, specifically with regard to providing relief to the parking situation at Badger Park. Also, development of processes for field cancellation and streamlining document collection as well as review of policy and procedure for the upcoming spnng season will be highlighted. • 3 �1 \0 To: Park Commission From: Twila Grout, Park Secretary Date: August 5, 2004 Re: Park Agenda Item #5 —STLL Proposal At the time that the park packet was being assembled I had not received any information from South Tonka Little League. At the July 13 meeting South Tonka Little League representative Tim Beduhn was present to discuss several requests by Little League. Because this was not on the agenda it was suggested that Mr. Beduhn appear before the commission at the next park meeting. 0 If I receive any information from STLL I will let the Park Commission know. MO in" To: Park Commission From: Twila Grout, Park Secretary Date: August 5, 2004 Re: Park Agenda Item #6 — Freeman Park Plaza Plan City Administrator, Craig Dawson, stated that a representative from the Park Foundation will be attending the Park Commission meeting to present and discuss a more specific design regarding the park plaza landscape and furniture. 0 4� b Y 0 DONOR POLICY DONOR RECOGNITION .mF I a 6 The City of Shorewood seeks to recognize donors who wish to support the City's park system through distinguished effort or substantial gift. For the purposes of this policy, "Substantial Gift." is defined as at least 50% of the estimated cost: (a) of new construction, remodeling, or renovation; (b) of developing a new real property, i.e. park buildings, structures, real estate, etc.; or (c) the replacement of an existing, unnamed facility or landmark that requires substantial renovation at the time of the gift. U The policy determines procedures, for a fixed period or indefinitely, for recognizing amenities found within Shorewood parks. Items under this policy include park structures (pavilions, warming houses, shelters, plazas, etc); real estate to be to be used for parks or open space, interpretive areas, or active recreation; or other large -scale projects as discussed with the Park Commission and City Council. DONORS AND DONATION "Donors" or "Donation" as defined by 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. Recognition may be in honor of donor or donors, who may be individuals, groups of individuals, or corporations. a) The nature of the donation will assist in determining the type of recognition. b) Donors or donor representatives must sign a donor agreement that delineates terms of the contributions, unless donor wishes to remain anonymous. c) 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. • d) A plaque, or negotiated signage may be placed on a building, room, or facility to acknowledge a Donor. The design, wording, and location of the plaque require the approval of the City Council. e) Donations of a routine nature (e.g., trees, park benches and other furniture) shall be reviewed by the Public Works Director and/or the Park Commission. • For such routine donations, the donor shall pay for the delivered cost of the item to be installed. f) 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. g) Plaques or markers will not be placed for routine tree donations. Recognition carries no power of direction to the City on matters of schedule, design, furnishing, or priority of use. PROPOSALS (a) Any proposal for recognition shall be made through a formal submission to the Park Commission, who will examine all formal proposals and make a recommendation to Council. (b) 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. PROCEDURE Procedures governing approval of recognition proposals 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. Before Donation: To be considered for recognition, donation commitments must come during the schematic design phase of the project. Schematic design will be overseen by the appropriate departments of the City of Shorewood according to established procedure. (a) New construction, substantial renovation, or replacement projects will be considered for recognition opportunities. (b) All negotiations for recognition will be conducted in the first instance by the Park Commission. These steps should be followed: • 2 1► • Step One: Contact the Public Works Department to discuss the procedure for donation. This will include a formal proposal submitted to the City Administrator and Director of Public Works. Step Two: The individual, group, or corporation will 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. GENERAL GUIDELINES The Donor Agreement will include. the following: (a) In the event of demolition or deconstruction of a structure, its recognition or any part of it shall be the subject of fresh recommendations. (b) The style of recognizing structures and facilities should be consistent with the City's visual standards, or adhering to any City ordinances. (c) City Council may rescind a donor's recognition for just cause. • (d) 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. (e) Groundbreaking, dedication, or other ceremonies relating to gifts, shall be reviewed by the Park Commission and approved by the City Council. NAMING While the City prefers not to name facilities within its park system that are made possible with donations, 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 of Shorewood will give special recognition to commemorate long -term service to the community or to a distinguished person, and such recognition is contingent upon Council review and approval. (a) The name used should normally be the family name, or in the case of a corporate entity, the shortest possible name. Unless Council determines • otherwise, a persons or corporations name may be used only once. K 1 (b) Naming 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. TIMING Proposed recognition will come at the time of amenity design schematic. Recognition may not be allowed after the amenity is operational except by Council review and approval. Method of donor recognition must be agreed upon and formally approved by City Council rip or to signing the donor agreement. METHOD OF PAYMENT (a) 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. (b) Individual donors may gift a portion of their contribution through an irrevocable trust or a contractual bequest mechanism. (c) 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. (d) Should the City fail to use the funds for the stated purpose in the Donor Agreement, the funds shall be returned to the donor. 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, 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 Council must approve the renewed recognition. 0 Eirm"I'.4 dI To: Park Commission From: Twila Grout, Park Secretary Date: August 5, 2004 Re: Park Agenda Item #8 — Goals, Priorities and Work Program Attached are the goals that the Park Commission set for 2004 for your review. At Tuesday nights meeting the Park Commission will be discussing the goals, priorities and working on setting up a 12 month work plan. • • EOM SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION 2004 GOALS 0 0 1. Water Garden — Freeman (Ongoing) 2. Community Event(s) — (January/February) • Define a vision • Define partners • Produce a revenue stream for parks • Regular programming 3. Dog Park - (March/June) • Explore space possibilities 4. Implementation Piece of Master Plan — (January /Ongoing) 5. Stay on Top of Highway 19 Trail Opportunities — (Ongoing) 6. Explore Skate Park Improvements and Incorporate into CIP if Appropriate — (April) 7. Explore LaCrosse Markets — (February) 8. Continue to Develop /Improve Concession Opportunity and Contract — (January) 9. Continue Commission Development Program — (March/April) 10. Keep a Full Commission — (Ongoing) 11. Signs for the Park— (June) • Explore Theme and cost 12. Continue Working with CRR on Year 2 of Field Allocation — (Ongoing) 0 Memorandum To: Park Commission From: Twila Grout, Park Secretary 00 Date: 8/5/2004 Re: Agenda Item - Signs for Parks On the 2004 goals the Park Commission listed as one of the goals - Signs for the Parks. Staff would like to know how the Park Commission would like to proceed in viewing signs for the parks. A couple of ideas would be to tour other city parks, have staff go out and take photos of park signs for the Park Commission to view. At Tuesday nights meeting the Park commission can determine how they would like to proceed with this goal. C • JD