051303 PK AgPCITY OF SHOREWOOD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003
•
W "A0171
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY HALL
7:00 P.M.
WORK SESSION IMMEDIATELY
FOLLOWING REGULAR MEETING
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
A. Introduction of New Park Commission
B. Roll Call
Arnst
Callies
Davis
Gilbertson
Meyer
Palesch
Young_
C. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of April 8, 2003(Att. -#2A Draft
Summary)
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
4. REPORTS
A. Update on Park Coordinator Progress — (Att. -#4A- Report)(Engineer Brown)
B. Update on Eddy Station - (Engineer Brown)
C. Report on Development of Park Commissioners Seminar Series with Minnesota
Recreation Parks Association - (Park Commissioner Young)
5. DISCUSS SCHEDULE AND FORMAT FOR UPCOMING EVENTS
A. Park Tours
B. Joint Meeting with Park Foundation
C. Determine Liaison for City Council Meeting of May 27, 2003
6. DISCUSS JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL
7. NEW BUSINESS Council Liaison:
May:
8. ADJOURNMENT June:
0
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING CITY HALL
TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2003 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING - RF . A
Chair Arnst called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present: Chair Arnst; Commissioners Meyer, Young, and Palesch; City Council
liaison Turgeon; City Engineer Brown; Finance Director Burton
Absent: Commissioners Callies and Davis
B. Review Agenda
Palesch moved, Young seconded, approving the Agenda as submitted. Motion passed 4/0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of March 11, 2003
Meyer requested that page 4, paragraph 5, be replaced with, "Meyer indicated that she foresaw
no way for the city to profitably run the concession stand this year. In the first place, no money
is available to make improvements to comply with the standards. Secondly, any information
from the attorney on the appeal will not be available until after April 1 and that seems to be just
the start to the appeal process. She believed that until the city can sell more than pop and candy
bars, this is not going to be a profitable situation for the city."
Meyers moved, Young seconded, approving the Park Commission Meeting Minutes of
March 11, 2003, as amended. Motion passed 4/0.
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were none.
4. REPORTS
A. City Council Meeting of March 24, 2003
Brown reported that the dog ordinance was presented and reviewed, corrections were made and the
Ordinance will appear on the Councils April 15, 2003 agenda.
Brown informed the Commission that a joint Park Commission, Planning Commission and City
Council meeting was scheduled for April 15, from 5:45 — 7PM.
With regard to the Smithtown Road trail, Brown reported that a number of residents were present to
discuss ongoing issues and that the City Council directed staff to proceed with the roadway, while
holding off on the trail. The City Council felt that the need for continuing evaluation of the trail
planning process was evident from this scenario. Brown commented that review of the process
would be interesting, since no less than 5 public meetings were scheduled during the Smithtown
Road pedestrian way planning process.
i
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003
PAGE 2 OF 8
At a Commission and staff level, Brown reported that it was difficult to evaluate or come to a solid
conclusion based on the lack of a consensus and the split decisions of the public. The Council felt
further consideration should be given to budget constraints and financing in light of the fact that both
the intersection and Smithtown Road project are vying for State Aid Funds. Since a mere $1.6 -$1.7
million is available in the State Aid Fund for both projects, the Council questioned the expenditure of
$200,000 on the pedestrian way.
Meyer suggested that more be done to define who impacts the decision to move forward with a trail
or not. She wished to see time devoted to analyzing which neighbors merit the most weight in a
decision of this nature, is it merely the immediate neighbors who decide or is it based on the good of
the overall community, and how far that is measured needs to be defined.
Chair Arnst maintained that, just as the redevelopment of Smithtown Road is viewed as good for the
entire community, she questioned how the trail could be viewed any differently. She believed that
added weight to nonissues such as litter and trespassing should not be warranted as they are
unproven throughout the community.
Brown indicated that staff had discussed this point as well and, technically, believe this to be a safety
issue, and that the pedestrian way should be viewed similarly as important as the roadway by
providing space to more than those immediately affected neighbors. It was determined that a new
process, a litmus test, must be created in order to come to a solid conclusion. A process which
provides the Commission and Council with the tools to better evaluate what parameters the decision
is based on, safety, recreation, etc. Once the parameters are determined, the City can identify their
focus group and who should be weighted in on the process. Prior to the Vine Hill Road trail project,
there was little on the books with regard to trails, Brown pointed out that the City has come a long
way in the planning process. Unfortunately, in situations like Smithtown Road, where there is a
division of philosophy, the policies are not clear on defining the process; therefore, need to be
subject to review.
Chair Arnst stated that, unfortunately, what weighs hugely on this issue is the ROW problems
encountered and the lack of money to gain those easements.
Brown agreed that, years ago, it was much easier to go forward and obtain ROW's, whereas today,
people have gotten much better at putting up roadblocks to a project.
With regard to Smithtown Road, Chair Arnst questioned how stalling the pedestrian space
construction might impact the costs down the way as the roadway continues to be built.
Brown indicated that certainly the costs would go up; pointing out that a total of 5% of the cost of
any project goes to the mere mobilization of the project to get it rolling. He noted that once the
Smithtown Road project is complete, people will be surprised to see that the roadway is still quite
narrow and perhaps they will mobilize the effort to construct the added trail at that time.
Chair Anst questioned whether the Smithtown pedestrian way issue would be returning to the Park
Commission. 0
As the Park Commission had already spent a great deal of time on the process, Brown recognized
that the Commission might be hesitant to be brought in further. He indicated that Administrator
Dawson would be creating a more detailed trail planning process, to which the Park Commission
could be brought in to comment on if they chose.
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003
PAGE 3 OF 8
Palesch voiced her frustration that the minority have succeeded in eliminating the construction of the
trail for the majority who wish to see it built. She stated that it was difficult to weight the nearly 14
residents who were opposed to granting their ROW, against the approximately 28 who were willing
to grant easements and the general public who felt the pedestrian way was a benefit to the
community. She suggested constructing the pedestrian way skipping the homes whose ROW's were
not granted as the Commission discussed at one time.
Brown asked if the Park Commission wished to be a part of the re- evaluation process.
Chair Arnst indicated that the Commission would be reluctant to continue to beat up on people
regarding this project. She believed they had done all that they could, following the process over the
course of 5 years, and made their recommendation to the Council.
With regard to the trail planning process itself, Palesch felt that it had proven to be successful in
certain situations, such as the Covington/Vine Hill Road trail. In areas where neighbors wish to see a
trail, Palesch believed they could petition the City to do so, even in the case of Smithtown Road. She
believed neighbors could pressure each other, in a grassroots campaign, and then approach the City
to construct a trail.
Brown suggested the City pick a percentage, say 85 %, as the litmus test of whether a trail should
proceed or not.
In her opinion, Chair Arnst could identify two kinds of projects, a trail that a neighborhood asks the
City to provide, versus a trail as part of a road improvement project where the pedestrian space is
part of the road project and is subject to a unique set of questions.
Turgeon asked if the Commission would prefer not to be involved as part of the trail planning
process for road improvement projects.
Meyer felt these were not park related, nor was it a Park Commission function to evaluate road
construction trail projects..
Young still found it difficult that such a large group came out at the eleventh hour in opposition to
the project. After years of negotiating the process, with little comment from these individuals, he
questioned where they were throughout the process.
Brown indicated that it is not uncommon for people to come out late claiming they knew nothing of a
project, even after articles, public meetings, mailings, etc.. Brown stated that, one would think, given
the numerous opportunities and time devoted to this process people would know what's going on in
their own backyard. He suggested stakes or big orange signs alerting the public to what's going on.
Meyer agreed it must be put in people's faces more forcibly than the public process.
• Chair Arnst was surprised by the lack of civility neighbors have shown to one another in this latest
process, as one neighbor told her that other neighbors had actually threatened her over this issue.
Brown reiterated that the City needs to strive to find a way to supply people with the tools to give us
their feedback.
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003
PAGE 4 OF 8
Palesch argued that the City has provided people with ample opportunity and numerous times to
provide feedback; the breakdown comes from their lack of response to those efforts.
B. Update on Park Commission Seminar
Chair Arnst reported that she had contacted the Mn. Park and Recreation Association and hoped to
hear from them soon regarding a possible date for a seminar. She promised to have more to report at
the next meeting.
C. Update of Smithtown Road Pedestrian Space
Discussed under Reports 4A.
5. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Director Burton recapped the 2002 Financial Activity, during which the City Council authorized a
transfer from the General Fund specifically to enable the Park Fund to repay its inter -fund loan to the
Sewer Fund for the construction of the Eddy Station building. She reported that overall, 2002
revenues exceeded expenditures by a small amount of roughly $6,000 48,000. As no Capital
Improvement Projects (CIP) were scheduled for 2003, the Park Commission will be asked to take
into consideration the Park Master Plan and provide recommendations for 2004 within the next few
months. Burton explained that the Park Fund has received Park Dedication Fees from Cub Foods in
the amount of $27,032 and expects to receive $15,000 from the Lake Linden development in 2003.
Future Park Dedication Fees may include $30,000 from the Capestone addition, and funds provided
by the Park Foundation as it works to continue to honor its commitment to provide donations of
$100,000 over ten years.
In an effort to evaluate new funding sources, Burton noted that other communities direct a portion of
their liquor revenues for park improvements. The Liquor Committee was approached and they felt
capital improvement projects should be evaluated on a case by case basis.
Meyer asked what liquor revenues are typically spent on.
Burton indicated that the liquor operations have only recently become profitable, and in fact, those
profits are down 30% at Shorewood Village. The Committee intends to use these funds to refurbish
the Shorewood Village store and ongoing discussion continues with regard to building a new store
near the Oasis.
Chair Arnst asked what the Park Trail Fund balance was at and where those funds generally come
from.
Burton indicated that the balance is currently at 0, and transfers from the Roadway Fund have fed the
Trail Fund in the past. •
Meyer appreciated and recognized staff and the City Council for pardoning the Park Commission of
its debt. She inquired whether the Park Foundation commitment would be pardoned as well.
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003
PAGE 5 OF 8
• Based on recommendations from the City auditors and moving forward with a positive purpose,
Burton noted that the Park Commission was pardoned of its debt in order to allow it to move forward
on a positive note and not be forced to continually dig itself out of a hole.
Turgeon asked how the park seminar would be funded.
Burton indicated that the seminar would be funded out of the operating budget, not the CIP.
Chair Amst encouraged the Commissioners to consider how they would like to move forward and
allocate these funds based on the Park Master Plan. She suggested the Commission hold a work
session in May to discuss ideas.
Meyer commented that she believed the Commission should be thoughtful in its planning and not in
a hurry to spend the money.
Chair Anst and Young thanked the City Council for taking the Commission out of debt.
Brown pointed out that the City Council recognized the possibility that the City might be saddled
with the debt from Eddy Station if the Park Foundation failed to live up to its commitment at the
outset of the project. He noted that the Park Commission balance was $100,000 towards the
$345,000 project.
Burton indicated that the City hopes the Park Foundation will continue to honor its commitment and
strive to make other marvelous improvements to the parks.
Chair Arnst asked Burton to provide the Commission with guidance in its upcoming work session.
6. CONSIDER CONCEPT OF OPERATION FOR CONCESSION STAND
Meyer reported that she had met with Chair Arnst, Brown, and members of staff to discuss the
viability of concessions at Eddy Station and to formulate a proposal. She reviewed the Concession
Proposal memorandum provided to the Commission pointing out that the goals would be to provide
an amenity to Freeman Park that would break even financially. By establishing a business
relationship with an individual to oversee the operation and management of Eddy Station, Meyer
explained that the concessions would be open Mon - Thurs. from 5:30 — 8:30 PM, and some
Saturdays, at the discretion of the overseer. She reviewed responsibilities of the overseer as laid out
in the proposal and indicated that the work force would likely be made up of volunteers from sports
organizations. With regard to compensation, Meyer explained that the overseer would receive 75%
of the net proceeds, and the City would receive the remaining 25%.
Chair Arnst pointed out that representatives of MGSA had already committed to providing
volunteers two nights a week, for a total of 12 volunteer hours. Since MGSA currently has a pool of
volunteers at Bennett Park, Jeff Bailey of MGSA, believed they would pull from that pool of
• volunteers to provide their kids with a concession booth at Freeman. After contacting TUSA, Chair
Amst indicated that they were noncommittal and wished to see a proposal in writing, questioning
what would be in it for them. Chair Arnst asked for staff assistance in submitting a proposal in
writing to both organizations. At this point, she indicated that the concession proposal needs both
City Council approval and full Park Commission support to move forward.
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003
PAGE 6 OF 8
Meyer indicated that the draft proposal was created with input from numerous people. As a City
operated concession seemed unfeasible, the City would like to turn the business over to an .
independent operator. Keeping in mind that a separate concession stand exists at Freeman, the City
would do its best to ensure the new concession complied as best it could, by providing it with
additional equipment.
Brown suggested the Commission either continue to challenge the Health Department ruling so that
the City could run the concessions, or purchase equipment like the freezer /refrigerator for $450, dog
machine, etc.for an independent contractor to take over.
After a recent tour of Bennett Park concessions and conversations with representatives from Bennett,
Meyer noted that Bennett has agreed to loan Shorewood two hot dog machines on a trial to purchase
basis to make sure they are what the City wants before we buy them. At that time, Bennett would sell
both machines to the City for $250. Meyer continued by reviewing the concession equipment page,
including popcorn machine, potential for a coffee urn, freezer, slushy machine, and soda suggestions.
She pointed out that a portable popcorn machine could be a useful investment for the City.
Brown stated that he would be meeting with the vendor who provides supplies to Bennett and Long
Lake concessions.
Meyer indicated that Charlie Davis has expressed an interest in overseeing the concession business at
Freeman Park Eddy Station. He also suggested that he could oversee inventory similar to a vendor.
Young questioned whether the City should distance itself further from the concession business. He
believed the City should let the volunteer sports organizations know that there is always the
possibility the concessions could be shut down.
Burton commented that she could see that the Commission and Meyer had been very creative in
setting up the concession business. She urged the City to set up any concessionaire as an independent
contractor. She further suggested that the City Attorney be contacted to provide his input regarding
this proposal and agreed that the City should distance itself from the contractor.
While he agreed that the City Attorney's comments were warranted, Brown believed that any
contract would be viewed as a separate contractual arrangement by the Attorney. He maintained that
the City is allowed to seek out contractors for work and that this position would be somewhat similar
to the contracted janitorial services the City currently uses.
Burton pointed out that the janitorial services do not come with a profit motive.
Meyer questioned whether the concessions could be run through the Park Foundation to remove it
entirely from the City arena and put it in a nonprofit sector. If the City Attorney sees a conflict, she
suggested contacting the Park Foundation to use the concession operations as a fundraising avenue;
whereas, the 25% would go to the Park Foundation instead of the City.
Meyer indicated that the initial start -up equipment would be purchased by the City. •
Brown felt the purchase of $1,000 in equipment would be necessary up front.
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003
PAGE 7 OF 8
• Chair Amst questioned whether the City could make the investment in the equipment, line up an
independent contractor, obtain an opinion from the City Attorney, and contact the Park Foundation
etc. as soon as possible.
Turgeon suggested obtaining the Attorney's opinion before the City Council meeting next week.
Meyer noted that the Park Foundation would have little to lose, by merely providing their support,
collecting the receipts, paying the overseer, and managing inventory they would receive 25% of the
proceeds.
Turgeon suggested they consider providing additional volunteerism in the effort, either via their
organization or by contacting the sports organizations on their behalf.
When asked why he supported the concessions at Eddy Station, Brown stated that Jeff Bailey of
MGSA indicated that he just wanted the kids to have a good experience at the fields and playing ball.
Some discussion with regard to treat tickets ensued and was tabled for later discussion.
Young complimented Meyer and others on the amount of work they'd devoted to developing a viable
concession proposal. He supported the concept.
• Palesch voiced her support for the concession concept and suggested they pursue channeling the
concessions through the Park Foundation.
Meyer inquired whether city staff would maintain control of the concessions if it is run through the
Foundation.
Brown indicated that the City would maintain overall control.
Chair Arnst recapped the need to get sports organization buy -in, obtain the City Attorney's opinion,
and gain both City Council and Park Commission support for the concept.
Brown suggested that, if the Park Commission were comfortable with proceeding, they make two
motions, the first motion would approve the concept, directing staff to work with the City Attorney,
and bring it forward to the City Council at the earliest possible time, the second motion would
approve the expenditure of funds up to $1,000 on the purchase of equipment.
Turgeon asked if staff could obtain an opinion from the Attorney by the next Council meeting.
If the Council were given a recommendation and Attorney comments, Meyer questioned whether the
Council could discuss and/or approve the concept next week.
Chair Arnst indicated that, with staff assistance, she would write and fax a letter to Kay Turner at
TUSA to show her board.
Meyer moved, Palesch seconded, to direct staff to move ahead with the concept for operation of
Eddy Station concession stand in 2003, consult the City Attorney regarding the legalities of an
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2003
PAGE 8 OF 8
f
independent operator, and put this on the City Council agenda for April 15, 2003, contingent
upon buy -in of the sports organizations. Motion passed 4/0. •
Meyer moved, Young seconded, to recommend the City Council approve the expenditure of
funds of up to $1,000 for additional equipment to be used at Eddy Station and other venues.
Motion passed 4/0.
7. DETERMINE DATE FOR JOINT WORK SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL
Brown reported that the Work Session was scheduled for Monday, April 15, 2003 at 5:45 P.M.
8. DETERMINE LIAISON FOR APRIL 14, 2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Chair Arnst agreed to act as liaison for the April 14, 2003 City Council Meeting.
9. NEW BUSINESS
Upon her tour of Bennett, Meyer pointed out that they had used a brick program to build a brick
wall at the park.
Chair Arnst questioned the potential for using the bricks as part of the Eddy Station fagade.
As another option, Brown suggested using the bricks to adorn the wall where the drinking •
fountain could be hung.
A Work Session was scheduled for May 13, 2003, as a piggyback to the regular Park
Commission meeting.
Brown noted that two residents had expressed interest in the open Park Commission seats and
would be interviewed on April 21. Turgeon added that the Commission would likely have a new
Commissioner by its May meeting.
10. ADJOURNMENT
Young moved, Meyer seconded, adjourning the April 8, 2003 Park Commission Meeting at
8:55 P.M. Motion passed 4/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Kristi B. Anderson
Recording Secretary
•
• community rec. resources
Date: 5/01/2003
To: Larry Brown, Park Commission, Honorable Mayor, and City Council
CC: Administrator Dawson
From: Kristi Anderson and Sally Keefe
RE: Summary Report of CRR activities from Feb. to April 30, 2003
This memorandum serves to provide a quarterly report on the activities and
challenges Community Rec. Resources (CRR) has faced in the months of Feb. thru
April, 2003. CRR believes that they've been very successful, thus far, in providing
Park Coordinator services to the City of Shorewood, and is happy with the progress
made to date.
CRR first met with City Staff to review information regarding the Spring
Informational Meeting with the sports organization representatives. Packets of
information were assembled and sent out to representatives and a meeting held on
Feb. 24, 2003, with mandated attendance for all representatives expecting field
usage. The overall philosophy that, change is good, was heard by all representatives
attending the meeting with approximately 90% of all data collected from the
representatives within one week's time.
Rosters have proven to be the biggest challenge in document retrieval. While many
organizations are not finished recruiting players until the months of March, April,
and May, they prefer their schedules be established in March. With the
implementation of the Park Priority Policy formula for equity of field usage, the
accountability of number of players remains critical, as it impacts usage and parking
issues. Since the next spring scheduling meeting is proposed for November or
December, CRR cautiously views providing schedules in advance of roster receipt
and numbers, an issue for further review. On the other hand, roster collection does
not appear to be as big a concern for fall scheduling, since there are fewer
organizations participating in fall sports.
In mid March, CRR then executed a first draft of the schedule ahead of the promised
deadline, working within the preferred scheduling parameters set forth by the
representatives of each sports organization. One area of conflict arose between two
sports organizations. CRR met with representatives of each of these organizations,
•
5/01/2003
from Feb. to April, 2003
Community Rec. Resources: Summary Report of CRR activities
presented a number of options, and empowered the representatives to get involved in
the decision - making process to determine feasibility for their own group, thereby,
eliminating the necessity to involve Council and City Staff in this issue. Also as part
of the resolution of this issue of conflict, CRR contacted other municipalities for
additional field availability, and continued to establish rapport with MCES
representatives. CRR also interviewed other municipalities and associations to
research and purchase scheduling software at the request of City Staff.
In consideration of scheduling issues, attempts were made to provide a schedule to
the sports organizations that also addressed parking concerns at Freeman Park.
Efforts were built into the schedule to,provide rest periods in the field usage and to
keep parking allocations, established through compilation of data and utilization of
the Hoisington Koegler Parking Feasibility Study and the Park Master Plans,
staggered to accommodate parking concerns of the past. CRR will continue to
monitor field usage and parking at Freeman Park as part of the scope of services
provided this season. While initial field monitoring has begun, the season is merely
beginning and ongoing monitoring will be provided and evaluated.
CRR continues to communicate with City Staff and representatives of sports
organizations regarding the changing needs of the Park Coordinator Position and
users of the facilities. Establishment of a website link, which also provides rainout
information, has been coordinated with City Staff and MCES to provide more
effective communication to sports organizations, and concession operators,
regarding changes in field use. Updated schedules will continue to be posted via the
website, as well as, sports organization contact information.
Overall, CRR is pleased with the progress gained since Spring Scheduling, and will
continue to provide quality service to the City at a reasonable cost. The focus for the
next three months will include preparation regarding the May 29, 2003 Fall Sports
Informational Meeting with the sports organization representatives, as well as,
monitoring of field usage and parking issues, implementation and refinement of
scheduling software, continued communication with MCES, sports organizations,
City Staff, and other municipalities and associations regarding the position.
Please do not hesitate to contact Kristi or Sally with further questions regarding the
Park Coordinator position.
Thank you for your consideration.
Kristi Anderson and Sally Keefe
Community Rec. Resources
P
2