121499 PK AgP`= 1
CITY
OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
.
PARK COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 14,1999 7:30 P.M.
AGENDA
1.
CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
A. Roll Call
Puzak
Dallman --
Arnst
Themig
Berndt
B. Review Agenda
2.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of November 9,1999 (Att.42A Draft Minutes)
3.
MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
4.
DISCUSS FACILITATOR/SET DATE FOR JOINT MEETING WITH SPORTS
ORGANIZATIONS (Mark Koegler)
•
5.
CONCESSION STAND - MULTI PURPOSE BUILDING
A. Review Design Plans for Kitchen Layout - Larry Brown
B. Discuss Kitchen Layout
6.
REPORTS
A. Report on Right of Way Research for Smithtown West (Larry Brown).
B. Review Vending Machines (Att. -#6B)
C. Review Recycling Scenarios - (Paula Berndt)
D. Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association - Consider Membership - (Mark Themig)
E. Report on Park Foundation Meetings of November 11 and December 9, 1999-(Att.-
#6E)(Ken Dallman)
F. Update on Skate Park - (Dan Puzak)
G. Review of Potential DNR Grants (Att.46G)
7.
SMITHTOWN WEST - DEVELOP TIME LINE FOR GRANT APPLICATIONS, ETC.
8.
SCHEDULE DATE AND NOTIFICATION PROCESS FOR WINTER TRAIL WALK
9.
OLD BUSINESS Council Liaison:
December - Puzak
10.
NEW BUSINESS January= ?
12.
ADJOURNMENT
SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
PARK COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9,1999 7:30 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
Co -chair Dallman called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. 6
A. Roll Call
Present: Co- chairs Dallman and Arnst; Commissioners, Puzak, Berndt and Themig;
City Administrator Jim Hurm; Councilmember Scott Zerby
It was noted that Commissioner Mary Bensman has resigned from the Park Commission
effective November 5, 1999.
B. Review Agenda
Commissioner Themig asked to include an item (413) to report about the Minnesota
Recreational Parks Association conference.
Co -chair Dallman requested an item to discuss ideas for the winter maintenance of the
LRT trail per request of the City Council. It will be added under item #7.
Commissioner Puzak asked to do a quick report on design ideas for a skate park. That
will be item 4E.
Arnst moved, Berndt seconded to approve the agenda as amended. Motion passed
5/0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of October 26,1999
Arnst moved, Themig seconded to approve the Minutes with the following change:
Page 5, Paragraph 6, Line 2-- Change "right -a -way" to right -of -way.
Motion passed 510.
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were none.
•
Park Commission
November 9, 1999 - Page 2
4. REPORTS
A. Report on Vending Machine
Administrator Hurm reported that the vending companies who were contacted by staff
were less than enthusiastic in their response. There was discussion on the reported
comments from the various companies. Council member Zerby pointed out that there can
be substantial cost for electricity to operate a machine. There were also comments about
the potential cost of vandalism, especially since it is intended to place the vending
machines in outside locations for greater accessibility.
Commissioner Amst asked about up front costs, such as security deposit. Themig
explained that the vending company fully maintains the machines and keeps them
stocked. The City is given a percentage of the profit for placing the machine on its
property. Hurm said there will be more information available at the next meeting, but so
far two of the three cities that were polled about keeping vending machines outside have
not had a good experience. Themig explained how vending machines can be secured to
prevent vandalism. Midwest Vending, which seems to be the preferred option, provides a
way to cage and bolt their machines.
Hurm said that additional cities will be called for further research. A draft RFP (Request
for Proposal) will be prepared for the Commission's review at their next meeting. It was
agreed that the idea of vending machines is still of interest.
B. Report on Recycling
Commissioner Berndt reported that she has new information about plastics. She stated
why she feels as a citizen that plastic should not go into an incinerator or land fills. E -Z
Recycling does have 90- gallon recycling drums with lids, which they empty weekly. The
cost is $20 per drum each month, which would total about $200 for all the Shorewood
parks. One possible plan is that the City could provide the drums at each park and collect
all of the recycling for pick -up at the public works facility.
Berndt feels that, by putting drums in parks, we would be educating youth about
recycling and setting a standard for them to follow. She also explained how the recycling
program in the City of Minnetonka operates. To cover costs, Berndt suggested the idea
of user fees or profits from concessions. The next step is to find a way to work with the
sports organizations.
Themig agreed that the City should recycle, especially since residents are asked to do it at
their homes. Berndt commented that there is time to research the subject further since a
program would not be implemented until springtime. Themig asked if there is a
possibility of staff collecting recycling from the parks. Hurm said there are reasonable
options. Co -chair Amst asked Commissioner Berndt to prepare information on funding
options for discussion at the next meeting. Berndt agreed, adding that as a citizen, she
feels that sports organizations should be more responsible for the problem. •
Park Commission
November 9, 1999 - Page 3
9 C. Report on Request for Proposals for Concession Sales in the Multi- Purpose
Building
Administrator Hurm presented a draft RFP, stating that it is difficult to do since we don't
know when it will be open. Co -chair Dallman thought that someone in the concessions
business would like to be considering a proposal around the first of the year so this is not
too far in advance. Hurm said that the little league association has indicated interest in
operating the concession stand.
Co -chair Arnst commented that the presentation of the RFP is very dry and would not
encourage much response. She suggested jazzing it up with a few more adjectives to
increase the appeal. Hurm agreed. Themig pointed out that with most RFP's, you don't
have to worry about selling it. But we may have to be more sales- oriented on this, saying
it's a great opportunity. Arnst added that the draft RFP does not indicate how large the
audience would be. Puzak said you also need to tell vendors what facilities they will
have available (freezers, grills, etc.).
The topic of licensing was also discussed. Puzak suggested that the City ask prospective
vendors to partner with us on the design of the kitchen area. To incorporate this into the
RFP, ask applicants if they have design capability and ask for suggestions for equipment.
Puzak also suggested checking with the people at BayView Event Center in Excelsior for
concession sales and advice. Dallman agreed.
Themig pointed out that often the product supplier will provide equipment for their
products. Hurm said that would be helpful, however the equipment would not belong to
the City, in which case we may not be able to rent out the facility. Themig agreed that it
may not work to rent out the facility when other users have their inventory and equipment
there. On the plus side, Puzak pointed out that the vendor would have to maintain their
own equipment. There was discussion about securing the vending area from the rest of
the building for rental.
Council member Zerby asked why there had been talk about sharing profits with the
Shorewood Park Foundation. Hurm said it would depend on the future role of the
Foundation and how funds are to be used. That would be up to the Park Commission and
City Council. Dallman explained that when the first RFP was done, that was the intent
because the Foundation was going to fund the construction of the concession building.
Hurm asked if the general consensus of the Park Commission is that money from
concessions would go to the general fund. The Commissioners said yes.
Zerby also mentioned that January 4, 2000 is a bad time for the deadline and suggested it
be pushed out further. Hurm agreed. Themig suggested February 1, 2000. Hurm said it
is usually 6 to 8 weeks after the RFP is approved and sent out. Dallman said that would
be fine.
•
Park Commission
November 9, 1999 - Page 4 '
Themig suggested submitting a market study, even though it may be too sophisticated for
the level we are going. He also commented that the insurance requirements have
changed. Hurm said he will bring that question to the City attorney. Dallman asked if
the agreement would go per calendar year. Hurm said it may be longer -2 to 5 years.
D. Report on Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association Conference
Commissioner Themig reported that he attended the MRPA conference and suggested
that the City of Shorewood may want to consider becoming a member. The Association
is becoming a strong advocate for parks in the State. Themig offered to bring more
material to the next meeting, if appropriate.
Themig attended one session on skate parks by a group that assesses risk. He explained
that they have tier 1 and tier 2 facilities. The session was good and he will pass on the
information to Commissioner Puzak. There was also a vendor that helps coordinate or
produce signs, if the Commission wants to do advertising in the parks. Themig brought a
handout for the file.
Also, the DNR had information on grant timelines. Some applications are due at the end
of January. Themig explained there are two processes. February 28 is the trail grant
deadline, so we need to move soon. Other grants are available for obtaining conservation
easements. Themig recommended that City staff start working on grant applications. He
especially thought the Smithtown trail segment may be a great possibility for funding.
Themig said there was a group from the Center for Energy and Environment, which
focuses on renewable energy for parks. He thought it might be a good resource for
Commissioner Berndt and passed on some information to her.
Hurm said he would coordinate grant information for staff, saying that there is a need to
be careful about timing. It's tough to apply for a grant for a project that isn't yet
approved. It has to be thought through and presented appropriately. He said it would be
presumptuous to apply for a grant before the trail process is far enough along, (citing the
example of the Vine Hill Road trail).
Themig said he was talking about the west end of Smithtown, which is a go except for
funding and design details. If not now it's a whole year away. He recommended at least
an informal request be sent in now. Hurm said okay. Berndt added that she has heard
from parents of Minnewashta students who are anxious for a trail.
8:25 City Engineer Larry Brown arrived.
E. Update on Skate Park Design
Commissioner Puzak distributed information from the November 4 meeting of the
Skatepark Design Committee, including a draft drawing for a possible design. There
were 4 teens and a few adults at the meeting. Puzak explained that he presented the a
Park Commission
November 9, 1999 - Page 5
concept of the big picture that this is a park first, not just a skate facility. He showed a
list of things they wanted to cover as they design the park.
The plan is to be a tier 1 level facility in order to avoid insurance costs and supervision
requirements, etc. These are all issues to consider in design. Matt Pike's friend, Tim
Hughes, has been involved in other parks and visited them to do research. He created a
drawing of phase 1, which Puzak showed to the Commission. The budget is $28,000 for
that much if done by the vendor. They will try to get it down to a budget of under
$20,000.
Puzak described some of the details of the design, saying it is a good concept. He also
reported that the group is doing a great job and making good progress. The next meeting
is Saturday, November 20.
Hurm said that it still has not been determined if a Conditional Use Permit will be needed
for the project. He doesn't think one is technically needed however there still needs to be
communication with neighbors. He also reported on the status of fundraising for the
project. Greenwood, has set aside $600. Tonka Bay has agreed to $1,500. Shorewood
will give $7,000. Excelsior has questions. Deephaven has shown interest. Mayor Love
also indicated his company may donate funds. And there are the efforts of the Park
Foundation.
Co -chair Dallman brought up the improvements to the Little League field at Freeman
is Park. There will be a public hearing and an application for a variance. Dallman also said
that the City Council has agreed to waive the application fee, but will have to go through
the process in order to add the dugout.
5. UPDATE ON THE TRAIL PLANNING PROCESS, RIGHT OF WAY
RESEARCH AND VINE HILL /COVINGTON DESIGN
Engineer Larry Brown has met with Don Sterna of WSB and has been assured that plans
are nearing completion. They are at the point of doing some revisions. Brown added his
own personal caution to remind the Commission that design professionals and
consultants need time to see if a plan makes sense besides meeting technical criteria. He
cited the example of problems resulting from time pressure on the Eureka Road
watermain project.
In the case of the Vine Hill/Covington trail and the Freeman Park building, Brown is of
the opinion that WSB knows the City's priority and he does not want to push more than
needed. They have committed to have both projects ready to bid in the spring.
Co -chair Arnst asked Brown if he is feeling pressured. Brown replied that the items have
reappeared over the last three agendas and he just wants the Commission to know we are
not letting the project slide. He wants to reiterate that we have good professionals and are
4p working hard.
Park Commission
November 9, 1999 - Page 6
Arnst acknowledged the point and said they keep this on the agenda to keep the
Commission thinking of it and to keep it alive and current —not to apply pressure. Brown
said that he and Mayor Love talked about the Freeman building. There is a lot of energy
going toward this project, along with the trail plan. It is important to everyone and must
be kept in the public eye so they do not lose interest.
Themig said he thinks a spring bid is realistic, but asked Brown if he thinks they need to
extend the timeframe. Brown said it will be ready for a February or March bid, which is
good timing. Zerby said there are lots of things going for bid at that time and asked if
that is unusual. Brown said it is optimum timing and is not unusual.
Co -chair Amst asked about the progress of the rights -of -way research. Brown said he
met with the attorney's assistant this past week. They need to spend more time at
Hennepin County, but hope to have a good feel in the next three weeks or so. Brown will
provide an update at the December Park Commission meeting.
Puzak restated the need to solicit help of a partner who knows the food service industry in
planning the final design of the Freeman Park building. Brown said that is one thing we
have going for us —we have a design professional who knows lots of other industries. As
we seek vendors, we will also work with those who offer suggestions.
Hurm brought up the potential Smithtown west trail segment, saying we want that to go
as smoothly and timely as possible. The big thing is to research right -of -ways. We need
to keep in mind a timeline to anticipate the next controversy.
6• REVIEW USER FEE PROPOSALS
Commissioner Themig handed out information on the base costs for park maintenance
and explained the additional costs generated by the various sports organizations. He then
described the park -use policy and cost estimates for the various uses. The policy states
that the City will provide basic park facilities. Improvements made by sports associations
become the property of the City. Themig also explained about exclusive use and
reservation fees for exclusive use.
The calculations were explained for the individual sports. It was pointed out that the cost
is high to provide hockey facility, yet their use is only a portion of the available time.
Themig also explained the "Options for Recovering Costs for Providing Above Base
Maintenance" chart. With this there is an even fee, and it is easy to administer, but not
the fairest method. Option 3 is the most reasonable plan. It recognizes the City as a
partner so each pays 50 %. This covers some of cost the City is incurring but also
provides exclusive use.
Hurm said each association is currently paying $3500 per year. An immediate problem is
that some organizations are not able to always pay even that amount. He cited the
example of adult softball and asked if you do not allow them to play the next year if they
Park Commission
November 9, 1999 - Page 7
can't pay. Themig suggested another option of offering the facility to some other group
who can use it more efficiently.
Puzak complimented Themig on his work, saying it is the beginning of fact -based
decision making. Themig said this has been in the discussion phase for over a year. The
Commission should move forward with a proposal and talk with the associations about
this data. We need to decide where we stand with this, and also need input from the City
Council on what their expectations are. Another question is what happens to this income.
Can the Commission redirect the funds?
Puzak pointed out the disparity between the various organizations in how they have paid
(or not) in the past, pointing out that it is a mixed bag. He would like to invite them to
meet with the Commission, show them the present data and ask how they can help.
Puzak urged they try to negotiate a win/win situation based on their ability to pay or
provide services in lieu (such as manning the concession stand). We do not want to crush
their ability to play.
Arnst mentioned that if all are together, there could be conflict over perceived inequity.
Puzak said if the data is true, no one can contest it. We just need a good facilitator and
then mediate toward a middle ground. Dallman agreed it is a good idea to have a joint
session with all together, rather than individually.
Themig said there are a couple of questions to answer: Are we moving toward user fees
for athletics? If so, we need to talk with them about it. If they can't fund the cost, they
need to look at the activity to provide fewer fields and schedule better. Puzak agreed,
suggesting they may need to offer space to someone who can use it more effectively —
redivide the pie based on usage.
Engineer Brown explained that his data was based on square footage. He could not
quantify wear and tear on fields. The ability for organizations to pay the fee is based on
the numbers who use it. Yet the intensity of use does not parallel the numbers of players
in an area. Themig said you then lose the factual data that was used to justify the fees,
which was focusing on what it costs to provide the facility.
Puzak said he is more comfortable with basing fees on the actual cost and agreed that we
may need to re- divide the resources based on the actual need. It's the right direction to
allocate resources based on the actual use.
Hurm spoke in defense of Engineer Brown's point about intensity of wear. In the
example of soccer, where the fields are more heavily used than softball, perhaps the
soccer fee should be more because of intensity of use. Themig said they did factor in
additional labor above base cost. It's not our role to say how the organizations generate
revenue to cover this — whether a per- capita fee or some other way.
Puzak suggested staying as close to the City's costs as we can and partner with the sports
organizations to allocate the resources to optimal use. It's the right thing to do. Arnst
Park Commission
November 9, 1999 - Page 8
asked how to structure the meeting. Dallman said we have the numbers. Just present the
information. Puzak stated this is about ongoing maintenance cost (not improvements).
Just put it out there and work with them to make it as equal as possible.
Arnst asked if it is our desire to hear them agree on that night? Puzak said it's the
beginning of education. Here's what we know and the goal is user -based funding. Arnst
asked what if they don't like it. Puzak replied that's okay. Then we talk about how to
make it palatable.
Themig pointed out that basic facilities come out of taxes. The various sports activities
are asking for more than basic facilities. It's worth something for them to have the
facility. Zerby brought up the point that it may be unfair to sports organizations, since we
are not charging for other play facilities such as playgrounds or tennis courts. Themig
explained that those are included in basic park equipment. Hurm added that those
facilities are not reserved either. Themig said it is like a picnic shelter, where they are
getting a guarantee of exclusive use during a set time, plus they have a great facility.
There was further discussion about distribution of facility vs. need.
Hurm suggested inviting Deb Malstem who schedules for Minnetonka Community
Education and Services to attend the meeting. Puzak said we might need a facilitator
such as Mark Koegler. There was discussion about what information to present to them.
Council member Zerby said he thinks the Commission is going in the right direction and
that the City Council would probably agree, but he can't speak for them. That is just his
feeling.
Arnst asked if, administratively it is going to be difficult to administer. Hurm said in the
case of hockey, it might need to be tracked. Overall, it is not a real nightmare. Arnst
asked which organizations have paid so far this year. Hurm said that not all have and
listed the various ones, explaining that it can sometimes take months.
There was further debate about the idea of a mediator and what qualifications to seek in
choosing one. It was decided to involve a facilitator. Staff will look for one and report at
the December meeting.
7. IDEAS FOR WINTER MAINTENANCE OF THE LRT TRAIL
Administrator Hurm explained that the City Council has asked if the Park Commission
has a preference on how to maintain the trail for winter use. Zerby explained that the
Council voted to plow the trail until December 15 to initially let people know of the
change to no snowmobiles on the trail. It was also thought that there may be difficulty
with plowing just half of the width. Dallman said the Council is looking to the
Commission to see if their thoughts make sense.
Puzak expressed his thoughts on why he believes the trail should be fully plowed for the
entire season. He said they must do something dramatic for at least the first two
snowfalls to get the message out there that the trail is gone for snowmobiles. There will is
Park Commission
November 9, 1999 - Page 9
be good- intended, well- educated snowmobilers who have a 1999/2000 map who think
4D they can go there. The City needs to plow the surface down to dirt for at least the first 2
snowfalls. (He commented that the City of Tonka Bay is thinking about reopening the
trail in their city, which would complicate the matter further.)
Puzak went on to say that some snowmobilers might not venture out until January after
the ice is frozen. If the trail is no longer being plowed, what do you do about them? The
first year is going to be a mess. He does not know how to solve it. If you want
compliance, plow it. Then by the end of winter or by January 15 or so, we can sense if
we can allow other uses.
Dallman asked about doing two parts of the trail in two segments differently. Puzak said
that is not a solution because half of the snowmobilers will come equally from either
direction. Arnst said this is a transition year and everyone will need to be patient.
Zerby said one concern is that by plowing the trail entirely, we would be taking away a
couple of activities and restricting it to pedestrians and horses. Amst pointed out that it is
not a permanent restriction, but a necessary part of problem solving.
Puzak said they must first decide what they are trying to do. If they are going to be
successful in changing the use of trail, they first have to stop snowmobile traffic.
Nothing else can happen until it is successfully stopped. The only way is to plow it. It
would not be fair to ticket a snowmobiler after the maps have been printed to indicate
snowmobile accessibility. At least not for a while.
Zerby asked if the trail is plowed completely, would the Commission recommend salt and
sand as needed. Puzak said staff should be empowered to solve that question in their own
judgement. Arnst agreed with Puzak and recommended his wording for a newsletter
article to explain why the trail will be plowed.
Puzak added that people are coming from all over the place on snowmobiles. The City
needs to educate about the change by plowing the surface. Zerby pointed out that the trail
is the last priority in the order of roads for plowing. Themig agreed with the
recommendation to plow until it is determined that snowmobiling has stopped.
Puzak acknowledged that for skiers and snowshoers, there will be problem. The decision
to plow is making it safe for them in the long run —not stopping them altogether. Berndt
agreed. There was further discussion about wording a recommendation. Puzak again
encouraged some patience because snowmobilers won't show up on the trail until the ice
is safe.
Arnst said she would like to have the City continue to get resident comments and
suggested they perhaps survey people on the trail. Themig suggested a sign could be
posted to ask for comments.
r:
Park Commission
November 9, 1999 - Page 10
Dallman asked if it would be okay with staff to change the policy in mid - winter. Brown
said it is no problem. Zerby added that the City Council agreed to listen to the Park
Commission's recommendation and be adaptable. They also suggested a wintertime trail
walk and follow -up report. There was consensus that a winter walk would be good.
Dallman recommended that the Council authorize the trail to be plowed fully until after a
winter trail walk in January and all agreed to that idea.
Arnst suggested a second component to plowing, which is constant communication about
the trail use for this winter. Puzak added that there will be complaints about snowshoeing
and skiing not being an option. This will need to be explained. Hurm clarified that the
final determination of trail surfacing for the entire season will be after a winter walk,
probably some time in January. Until then, plowing will be the plan. This will be
communicated in the City newsletter, along with a reminder to people to clean up after
their dogs.
8. REVIEW OF TO DO LIST
There were no questions or updates.
9. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business.
10. NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
11. ADJOURNMENT
Themig moved, Puzak seconded to adjourn the meeting. Motion passed 510.
The meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Connie Bastyr
Recording Secretary
Park Commission
•
11 4
•
•
•
(EN
To: Park Commission
From: James C. Hurm
City Administrator ; J
J
Date: December 8, 1999
Re: Vending Machines
The attached notes are not promising for raising money via outside vending machines.
Staff could meet with Midwest Vending at Freeman Park, ask for their recommendations
and for a proposal which could then be sent to the Park Commission for consideration:
Further discussion and direction from the Commission would be appropriate.
Vending Machines
Company
Comments
Midwest Vending
Full service vending service. They have
inside and outside vending machines. The
outside vending machines vandalism is
much higher. Vending machines can be
rented for seasonal term. They work with
Lakeville, Eden Prairie, Shoreview. He
commented that if would be easier if he
came out to explain their plan. Cost
depends on where the vending machines
will be placed.They are sending out
information.
Frontier Vending Machines
They will only have pop machines outside,
no candy machines outside. If the
buildings have no air conditioning they will
pull the choc. candy and chips as they are
hard to work with in the summer in regards
to the heat. Also, the warming houses have
to have adult supervision because they have
had problems with vandalism. He said
that they usually add 10 -15% to the price.
Pop is usually 65¢.
Safety Vending
Left Message. They have not returned
my calls as of 12 -6 -99.
Vendtronics
Manufacturing only.
American Vending
They will only do inside service. They no
longer offer outside vending services.
They lost money because of vandalism. I
have left a message for the sales person to
call me.They are not interested if there is
any seasonal vending.
Northstar Vending
Left message.
Jimmy Jingle
They only offer inside service. They do
offer seasonal vending depending on how
long the season is. They have installed
vending machines at warming houses with
snack vending and warm drinks vending
(such as hot cocoa, cuppuccino). But you
need running water to have this type of
vending machine.
•
C7
n
Updated 12 -6-99
q
City's With Vending Machines
9
17J
is
City Hall
Comments
City of Lakeville
They no longer have vending machines at
the parks. They have tried them a couple
times and it wasn't worth it. She said that
the more they tried to make them vandal
proof the more challenging it was for the
vandals.
Eden Prairie
They have a couple pop machines inside
the community center and park buildings.
No vending machines outside. They had to
close down a concession stand because it
wasn't profitable and health dept. issues. So
they did explore the idea of vandal proof
machines (like the ones you see at state
highway rest areas). It turned out it
wouldn't be profitable.
Chanhassen
No vending machines outside. They only
have vending machines inside.
Lake Minnewashta
They will be getting vending machines for
outside next spring. They have a 20x20
area where there is a wall- overhead door
that will close off the vending machines
after park hours.
Chaska
They only have vending machines in the 2
ice arena's. Because of vandalism they do
not have any outside vending machines.
Plymouth
They only have vending machines inside
the buildings.________
Apple Valley
Left message.
Golden Valley
They have no vending machines at their
arks.
Long Lake
No vending machines at the parks.
Updated 12 -6 -99
SHOREWOOD PARK FOUNDATION MEETING
• THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 11, 1999 SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
7:30 P.M. 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Ken Dallman called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. a
F
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Ken Dallman (Park Commission); Gordy Lindstrom (At Large); Bill Keeler
(At Large); Don Kelly (Rotary); Bob Noren (Seniors); Don Kronberg (American
Legion); Jim Hurm (City Administrator).
Absent: David Anderson (Little League); Jim Latterner (Tonka Men's Club); Tad Shaw
(Minnetonka Community Education); Scott Hanson (South Shore Softball); Don
Aslesen (Youth Hockey); Brian Lieffers (Tonka United Soccer); Jim Wilson
(Tonka Football).
2. REVIEW AGENDA
• The agenda was accepted as distributed.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
No action was taken on this item. The minutes of October 14, 1999 should be placed on the next
agenda for approval.
4. TREASURER'S REPORT
Treasurer, Tad Shaw was not present. However, Administrator Hurm reported that the
foundation has received $2,500.00 from the American Legion for the multi - purpose building at
Freeman Park. In addition, as of the end of September, the City had been investing $2,106.03 of
foundation funds.
5. DISCUSS FUNDRAISING EFFORTS
Two drafts of a fundraising brochure had been previously distributed to foundation members.
Those present went through both of the drafts. They choose draft number two with a number of
changes. The center inside fold would have 3 family activity pictures and would be included in
the newsletter. That same brochure would be sent to the sports organizations but with pictures of
youth sports activities in the inside centerfold. Each sports organization will be asked to
distribute a copy of this brochure to each of their members. It was determined that these
PARK FOUNDATION MINUTES
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 11, 1999
PAGE 2
brochures would be taken to Tonka Printing. A quality brochure perhaps an eggshell color
would be prepared with three or four colors for personal fundraising efforts. 50 -100 copies
would be prepared.
During the discussion of the brochure Ken Dallman moved, Bob Noren seconded to request
that Treasurer, Tad Shaw set up a post box which then could be included in the brochure.
Motion passed unanimously.
Bill Keeler moved, seconded by Bob Noren to authorize expenditures up to $1,500.00 for
fundraising brochures. Motion passed unanimously.
Administrator Hurm showed a computer composite of a skate park at the wayside stop area north
of Highway 7 near Old Market Road. He further reported that the cities of Tonka Bay,
Greenwood and Shorewood have set aside some funds for a skate park. Administrator Hurm also
reported that the multi - purpose building is still in the design stage.
The next meeting was set for December 9, 1999 at 7:30 p.m.
Don Kelly reported that he has invited Bill Taylor and John VanGieson to meet with the
foundation members to discuss estate planning.
6. ADJOURN
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
James C. Hurm,
Shorewood City Administrator
13
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
5(H) Lafayette Road
St. Paul. Minnesota 55155 -401_O
Date: November, 1999
To: Interested Recreation and Conservation Providers
From: Local Initiatives Grant Section and Trails and Waterways Division Staff
Subject: 2000 Grant Application Round
Enclosed you will find information on grant programs available for the 2000 application round.
Please review the materials carefully and thoroughly. Application requirements, such as due dates
for complete applications, do vary.
Though state funding for these programs is uncertain at this time, the DNR's state bonding
recommendation includes requests for funding local trail connections, water access and fishing
pier programs. Congress will likely authorize funding for the stateside portion of the Land and
Water Conservation Fund for the first time in several years. This would primarily affect the
Outdoor Recreation Grants Program. National Recreation Trail Funds are available. Initiating
the application process now provides more time for project completion if additional funding is
approved.
No additional funding for the Conservation Partners or Environmental Partnerships programs is
anticipated at this time, so proposals for these programs will not be solicited during this
application round. The exception to this is in the Twin Cities Metro Area where approximately
one half of the 1999 appropriation is still available for the 2000 grant cycle. A separate
solicitation will be made for these programs in the Metro Area.
If you are interested in applying for a grant, we recommend you return the AQolication Request
Form as early as possible. This will allow adequate time for the DNR staff to discuss the project
with you and provide you with the appropriate application materials. Lead time may be required
to meet application requirements, such as holding a public hearing, permit review, completion of
appraisals, etc.
A series of public informational meetings on these grant programs will be held in various locations
around the state in January. Please see the enclosed meeting schedule for the dates and locations.
•
DNR Infonmation: 651- 296 -6157 • 1- 888 - 646 -6367 • TTY: 651- 296 -5484 • 1- 800 -657 -3929
An Equal Opportunity E-*yu
Who values Diversity
Printed on ReWcMd Paper Contain ft a
Mart rnum of 10% Post - consumer Waste
The 7 Programs Included in this Information Packet
Program Name
Eligible Applicants
Application Due Date Max Grant Amo
Local Grants Program
Natural And Scenic Area Grant Program Local Units of Government, School Districts March 31 $500,000
Outdoor Recreation Grant Program Local Units of Government March 31 variable
Trail Grant Program
Local Trail Connections Grant Program Local Units of Government February 28 $50,000
National Recreational Trail Program
Regional Trail Grant Program
Local Units of Government, preferably in
cooperation with a local trail organization
Local Units of Government
February 28 $100,000
February 28 $250,000
Cooperative Water Recreation Program
Fishing Pier Grant Program Local Units of Government June 1 $20,000
Public Boat Access Program
•
Local Units of Government
•
open
variable
October 1999
A
C�
Department of Natural Resources
Statewide Grant Program Informational Meetings
January 11 at 1:OOpm
January 12 at 3:OOpm
January 13 at 3:OOpm
January 18 at 3:OOpm
January 19 at 7:OOpm
St. Paul
New Ulm
Winona
St. Cloud
Thief River Falls
Como Lakeside Pavilion
1360 N. Lexington Pkwy, St. Paul
Public Library
19 N Broadway St., New Ulm
County Historical Society
160 Johnson St., Winona
St. Cloud Civic Center
104 th Ave S., St. Cloud
Northland Tech. College
1101 Highway One East, Thief River Falls
APPLICATION REQUEST FORM
One Application Request Form should be submitted per project to the appropriate program staff (refer to the program
is information sheets enclosed for the mailing address). Please make copies of this form, as needed.
Applicant County
Contact Person
Title
Address
Phone Number (Daytime hours)
Project Name
Please check the appropriate program (if known) and provide an estimated total project cost:
Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program Regional Trail Grant Program
Outdoor Recreation Grant Program Fishing Pier Grant Program
Local Trail Connections Grant Program Public Boat Access Program
National Recreation Trail Program (Symms)
Total Estimated Cost: $
Congressional District (1 -8): Legislative District (1A -67B):
• Project Description:
October, 1999
• Natural And Scenic Area Grant Program
Information Sheet - 2000 Application Cycle
Program purpose To increase, protect and enhance natural and scenic areas.
How it works Provides state grants to local units of government for up to 50% of the cost of acquisition
of natural and scenic areas.
Eligible applicants Cities, counties, townships and school districts.
Eligible projects Eligible projects include fee title acquisition and permanent easement acquisition. Minimal
betterment activities are eligible as part of the proposed acquisition project and include
interpretive, educational or boundary signing and protective fencing.
Minimum Project proposals must have a total project cost of at least $10,000. Significant progress must
requirements be completed on active projects before an additional proposal(s) can be submitted.
Program Funding A maximum of 50% of the total eligible project costs not to exceed a maximum grant of
$500,000. Applicants must be able to fund at least 50% of the total project costs. Costs must
• be incurred and paid for before reimbursement can be made. Applicants are eligible to
receive more than one grant.
Grant awards The Department of Natural Resources will review and rank applications during the spring
of 2000. Grant awards will be announced in the summer of 2000.
Project period Funded projects must begin promptly after an agreement has been completed between the
State of Minnesota and the applicant. All components of the project must be completed by
December 31, 2002.
To Apply To receive an application, please submit an Awlication Request Form We recommend
that the Application Request Form be submitted before January 31, 2000. The completed
application is due on March 31, 2000 to be eligible for this fimding cycle.
Further Information Grants Manager (see enclosed Grant Manager Assignment List)
Local Grants Program
Department of Natural Resources
Office of Management and Budget Services, Box 10
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155 -4010
FAX: 651/296 -6047
WEB SITE: www.dnr.state.mn us
0 September, 1999
Grant Manager Assignments
For further information about either the Outdoor Recreation or the Natural and Scenic Area Grant Pro
contact the Grant Manager for your area.
Audrey Mularie
(651) 296 -4705
audrey.mularie@dnr.state.mn.us
County Region
Joe Hiller
(651) 296 -4891
joe.hiller@dnr.state.mn.us
County Region
Becker
1
Tom Kranz
(651) 297 -3168
tom-kranz@dnr.state—mn.us
County
Aitkin
Region
3
Anoka 6
Big Stone
4
Beltrami
1
Benton
3
Blue Earth
4
Carver
6
Carlton
2
Brown
4
Cass
3
Chisago
3
Chippewa
4
Clay
1
Cook
2
Cottonwood
4
Clearwater
1
Dakota
6
Dodge
5
Crow Wing
3
Hennepin
6
Faribault
S
Douglas
I
Ita
3
Fillmore
Grant
I
I tca
as c
2
Freeborn
5
Hubbard
1
Kanabec
3
Goodhue
5
Kittson
I
Koochiching
2
Houston
5
Lake Of The Woods
1
Lake
2
Jackson
4
Mahnomen
1
Mille Lacs
3
Kandiyohi
4
Marshall
I
Pi
3
Lac Qui Parle
4
Morrison
3
Sherburne
3
Le Sueur
4
Norman
1
St. Louis
2
Lincoln
4
Otter Tail
1
Stearns
3
Lyon
4
Pennington
I
Wright
3
Martin
4
Polk
I
Mcleod
4
Pope
I
•
Meeker
4
Red Lake
I
Mower
5
Roseau
I
Murray
4
Scott
6
Nicollet
4
Stevens
I
Nobles
4
Todd
3
Olmsted
5
Traverse
I
Pipestone
4
Wadena
3
Ramsey
6
Wilkin
I
Redwood
4
Renville
4
Rice
5
Rock
4
Sibley
4
Steele
5
Swift
4
Wabasha
5
Waseca
4
Program Supervisor.
Watonwan
4
Wayne Sames
Winona
5
(651) 296 -1567
Yellow Medicine 4
MN Dept. of Natural Resources, Local Grants
500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155 -4010
Toll free number outside Twin Cities Metro Area: 888- MINNDNR
OCTOBER 26, 1999 I gmtmgr.doc
C]
• Outdoor Recreation Grant Program
Information Sheet - 2000 Application Cycle
Program purpose To increase and enhance outdoor recreation facilities.
How it works Provides matching grants to local units of government for up to 50 of the acquisition,
development and/or redevelopment costs of local parks and recreation areas.
Eligible applicant's Cities, counties and townships.
Eligible projects Park acquisition and/or development/redevelopment, includeing among others, trails, picnic
shelters, playgrounds, athletic facilities, boat accesses, fishing piers, swimming beaches,
campgrounds, and design and engineering (maximum of 10% of total project costs). Contact
the Grants Manager with questions about other eligible facilities.
Minimum Project proposals must include at least one eligible outdoor recreation facility and have a total
requirements project cost of at least $10,000. Land proposed for development/redevelopment must be
owned by the applicant or be part of an acquisition project. Significant progress must be
completed on active projects before an additional proposal(s) can be submitted.
Program Funding Grants are typically for 50 percent of the total eligible project costs. The remaining 50
percent "local share" can consist of cash or the value of materials, labor and equipment
• usage provided by the local sponsor or by local donations or any combination thereof. Costs
must be incurred and paid for before reimbursement can be made. Applicants are eligible
to receive more than one grant.
Grant awards The Department of Natural Resources will review and rank applications during the spring
of 2000. Grant awards will be announced in the summer of 2000.
Project period Funded projects must begin promptly after an agreement has been completed between the
State and the applicant. All components of the project must be completed by December 31,
2002.
To Apply To receive an application, please submit an Apvlication RequestForm We recommend that
the Application Request Form be submitted before January 31, 2000. The completed
application is due on March 31, 2000 to be eligible for this funding cycle.
Further Information Grants Manager (see enclosed Grant Manager Assignment List )
Local Grants Program
Department of Natural Resources
Office of Management and Budget Services, Box 10
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155 -4010
FAX:651/296 -6047
WEB SITE: www.dnr.state.mn us
• September, 1999
}
Grant Manager Assignments
For further information about either the Outdoor Recreation or the Natural and Scenic Area Grant Programs,
contact the Grant Manager for your area.
Audrey Mularie
(651) 296-4705
audrey.mularie@dnr.state.mn.us
County Region
Anoka
Big Stone
Blue Earth
Brown
Chippewa
Cottonwood
Dodge
Faribault
Fillmore
Freeborn
Goodhue
Houston
Jackson
Kandiyohi
Lac Qui Parle
Le Sueur
Lincoln
Lyon
Martin
Mcleod
Meeker
Mower
Murray
Nicollet
Nobles
Olmsted
Pipestone
Ramsey
Redwood
Renville
Rice
Rock
Sibley
Steele
Swift
Wabasha
Waseca
Washington
Watonwan
Winona
Yellow Medicine
6
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
4
5
4
6
4
4
5
4
4
5
4
5
4
6
4
5
4
Joe Hiller
(651) 296 -4891
joe.hiller@dnr.state.mn.us
County Region
Becker
Beltrami
Carver
Cass
Clay
Clearwater
Crow Wing
Douglas
Grant
Hubbard
Kittson
Lake Of The Woods
Mahnomen
Marshall
Morrison
Norman
Otter Tail
Pennington
Polk
Pope
Red Lake
Roseau
Scott
Stevens
Todd
Traverse
Wadena
Wilkin
MN Dept. of Natural Resources, Local Grants
500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155 -4010
Toll free number outside Twin Cities Metro Area: 888- MRNNDNR
Tom Kranz
(651) 297 -3168
tom.kranz@dnr.state.mn.us
County Region
Aitkin
Benton
Carlton
Chisago
Cook
Dakota
Hennepin
Isanti
Itasca
Kanabec
Koochiching
Lake
Mille Lacs
Pine
Sherburne
St. Louis
Steams
Wright
Program Supervisor:
Wayne Sames
(651) 296 -1567
3
3
2
3
2
6
6
3
2
3
2
2
3
3
3
2
3
3
0
•
•
October 26, 1999
LOCAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS GRANT PROGRAM
Information Sheet
2000
*
adlines/ Applications must be received no later than February 28, 2000. Pending the
mportant Dates: availability of funds, reimbursement grant awards will be announced in July
2000.
Program Purpose:
The emphasis of this program is to promote access between people and
651/296 -6048
desirable destinations, not to develop significant new recreation facilities. Its
Belcher
primary purpose is to complete trail connections between where people
218/755 -3969
live (e.g., residential areas within cities, and communities) and significant
a n
llila
public recreation facilities (e.g., parks and other trails). Priority will be given
218/327 -4409
to residential connections to state and regional facilities. A secondary
Tim Browning
purpose is to link existing trail segments.
How it works:
Provides reimbursement grants to local units of government for trail
Grant Amount:
projects or serves as a partial local "match" for a TEA -21 Enhancement
Local Match:
Project.
Eligible
Cities, counties, and townships.
Applicants:
services and /or to meet existing payroll (i.e., only contract services,
Local Support:
Local /area support must be demonstrated.
Minimum
Project must result in a trail linkage that is immediately available for use by
Requirements:
the general public. There must be demonstrated compatibility of the uses
Project Period:
provided by the project proposal with uses provided by the recreation
facility.
Eligible Projects: Land acquisition and trail development. However, acquisition of trail right-
For Application Requests or other information:
Dan Collins
of-way will only be eligible when it is proposed in conjunction with trail
"perpetual
651/296 -6048
development. Lands purchased with this fund will require a
Belcher
easement for recreational trail purposes," and trails developed with this
218/755 -3969
fund will require a twenty -year maintenance commitment by the project
a n
llila
sponsor. Projects inside state park boundaries and state trail corridors
218/327 -4409
and elements of the Regional Open Space System in the Twin Cities
Tim Browning
Metro System are ineligible.
Reimbursement
A maximum of 50 percent of the total eligible project costs.
Grant Amount:
Minimum- $5,000. Maximum - $50,000.
Local Match:
Fifty percent "cash match" for eligible elements of the project proposal.
Dave Wolff
Neither this funding source nor the "cash match" can be used for labor
507/359 -6066
services and /or to meet existing payroll (i.e., only contract services,
Bill Johnson
materials, and supplies are reimbursable). Match must not be other state
651/772 -7936
funds, Metropolitan Council Grants, or National Recreational Trail Program
November 1, 1999
(formerly Symms).
Project Period:
In most cases funding is only available through June 30, 2002. At that
time, the project must be completely developed and all billings submitted
to the DNR. In certain cases, this period may be extended for projects
receiving TEA -21 Enhancement funding.
Disbursement of
Grants are reimbursable. Costs must be incurred and paid for before
funds:
reimbursement can take place.
For Application Requests or other information:
Dan Collins
Statewide
651/296 -6048
Belcher
Northwestern MN
218/755 -3969
Send application request to:
a n
llila
Northeastern MN
218/327 -4409
Recreation Services Section
Tim Browning
Central MN
218/828 -2610
DNR/Trails and Waterways.
Craig Mitchell
Southeastern MN
507/280 -5060
Unit
Dave Wolff
Southwestern MN
507/359 -6066
500 Lafayette Road
Bill Johnson
Twin Cities
651/772 -7936
St. Paul, MN 55155 -4052
November 1, 1999
NATIONAL RECREATION TRAIL PROGRAM
Information Sheet - 2000
Deadlines/ The complete application is due on February 2s, 2000 to be eligible for this funding cycle. Reimbursement
Important Dates: grant awards will be announced in the Summer 2000.
Program Program funding comes from a portion of the revenue received by the Federal Highway Trust Fund from the
Introduction: Federal motor f I
How it Works:
Eligible
Activities:
Non - eligible
Activities:
MRTUA
Priorities for
2000
Local Match:
Size of Project
Project
Period:
Disbursement:
For
Application
Requests or
other
information:
ue excise tax paid by users of off -road recreational vehicles such as snowmobiles, off -road
motorcycles, all- terrain vehicles, and off -road light trucks. Approximately $1,000,000 will be available for
projects in 2000.
All projects must be sponsored by a unit of government, preferably in cooperation with a local trail
organization. Applications will be reviewed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the state's
trail advisory council, the Minnesota Recreational Trail Users Association ( MRTUA). With consideration given
to MRTUA's recommendation, the DNR will make the final selection decision. If selected, the recipient will
enter into a contract with the State of Minnesota after required environmental documentation is completed.
Procedures for reimbursement will be guided by State requirements as well as those by the Federal Highway
Administration. The DNR will only reimburse work that takes place after completion of the contract (i.e.,
nothing completed before the contract will be reimbursed).
Motorized and non - motorized trail projects are eligible for funding.
• Maintenance /restoration of existing recreational trails.
• Development/rehabilitation of trailside and trailhead facilities and recreational trail linkages.
• Purchase and lease of recreational trail construction and maintenance equipment.
• Construction of new trails on federal (with limitations), state, county, municipal or private lands.
• Acquisition of easements and fee simple title to property for recreational trails.
Redesign/relocation of trails to benefit/minimize the impact to the natural environment
Condemnation of any kind of interest in property.
• Construction of trails within federally designated wilderness areas (with some exceptions).
• Upgrading, expanding, or otherwise facilitating motorized use or access to trails predominantly used
by non- motorized trail users prior to May 1, 1990 on which motorized use is either prohibited or has
not occurred.
The Minnesota Recreational Trail Users Association has recommended the following priorities for 2000:
• Any eligible all- terrain vehicle, off - highway motorcycle, and off -road 4x4 truck projects.
• For snowmobile projects, priority will be given to capitol improvements, long -term easement
purchases, and trail modernization. Overcoming safety problems is a plus.
• For all non - motorized uses (horse, bike, in -line, skate, ski, and hike) priority will be given to trail
signage to improve safety, necessary trail facilities, and trail linkages to existing trail systems.
• Projects that accommodate both motorized and non - motorized uses will be given special
consideration.
• Projects that involve urban youth corps workers such as the Minnesota Conservation Corps will be
given special consideration.
Fifty percent (50 %) "cash match" for eligible elements of the project proposal is required.
• Neither this funding source nor the cash match can be used for in -house labor services and/or to
meet existing payroll (i.e., only contract services, materials and supplies are reimbursable).
• Regional Trail Grant Program, Outdoor Recreation Grant Program, and Local Trail Connection
Grant Program are not eligible cash matches for this program.
• Federal funds can be used as the cash match as long as the share attributable to the federal
government is less than 95 percent of the cost of the project.
This program may be used in tandem with 2000 DNR Grant -in -Aid Agreements for capitol
improvements to pay for activities eligible under both programs (contract services, materials and
supplies).
Project proposals must result in at least $5,000 of reimbursement or no more than $100,000 of
reimbursement.
Funded projects will need to begin promptly after an agreement has been completed between the State and
the applicant. Funding for these projects is only available through June 30, 2003. All components of the
project must be completed by this date.
Grants are reimbursable. Costs must be Incurred and paid for before reimbursement can take place.
Dan Collins
Ardon Belcher
Les 011ila
Tim Browning
Craig Mitchell
Dave Wolff
Bill Johnson
Statewide
Northwestern MN
Northeastern MN
Central MN
Southeastern MN
Southwestern MN
Twin Cities
•
651/296 -6048
Send application request to:
218/755 -3969
Recreation Services Section
2181327 -4409
218/828 -2610
DNR/Trails and Waterways Unit
507/280 -5060
500 Lafayette Road
y
507/359 -6066
St. Paul, MN 55155 -4052
.
651/772 -7936
FAX: (651)297 -5475
vember 1, 1999
REGIONAL TRAIL GRANT PROGRAM
Information Sheet
2000
n
Deadlines/
Applications must be received no later than February 28, 2000. Pending the availability
Important Dates:
of funds, reimbursement grant awards will be announced in July 2000.
Program Purpose:
The primary purpose of this program is to promote development of regionally significant
trails. Primary determinants of significance include length, expected use, and resource
3969
quality /attractiveness.
How it works:
Provides reimbursement grants to local units of government for trail projects or serves as
Tim Browning
a partial local "match" for a TEA -21 Enhancement Project.
Eligible
Cities, counties, and townships.
Applicants:
507/280 -5060
Local Support:
Local/area support must be demonstrated.
Eligible Projects:
Land acquisition and trail development. Priority will be given to projects that provide a
Twin Cities
useable trail. Land purchased with this fund will require a "perpetual easement for
Novwmbw 1,19N
recreational trail purposes," and trails developed with these funds will require a twenty-
year maintenance commitment by the project sponsor.
Reimbursement
A maximum of 50 percent of the total eligible project costs. Minimum - $5,000. Maximum -
Grant Amount:
$250,000.
Local Match:
Fifty percent "cash match" for eligible elements of the project proposal. Neither this
funding source nor the "cash match" can be used for labor services and/or to meet
•
existing payroll (i.e., only contract services, materials, and supplies are reimbursable).
Match must not include other state funds, Metropolitan Council Grants, or National
Recreation Trail Program (formerly Symms).
Project Period:
In most cases funding is only available through June 30, 2002. At that time, the project
must be completely developed and all billings submitted to the DNR. Pending approval
by the Legislature, this period may be extended for projects receiving TEA -21
Enhancement funding.
Disbursement of
Grants are reimbursable. Costs must be incurred and paid for before
funds:
reimbursement can take place.
For Application Requests or other information:
Dan Collins
Statewide
651/296 -6048
Ardon Belcher
Northwestern MN
218/755-
3969
Les 011ila
Northeastern MN
218/327 -4409
Tim Browning
Central MN
218/828 -2610
Craig Mitchell
Southeastern MN
507/280 -5060
Dave Wolff
Southwestern MN
507/359 -6066
0 ohnson
Twin Cities
651/772 -7936
Novwmbw 1,19N
Send application request to:
Recreation Services Section
DNR/Trails and Waterways
Unit
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155 -4052
Cooperative Water Recreation Grant Programs
Information Sheet - 2000 Application Cycle
I►
•
Application: 1. Public boat accesses - A cooperative acquisition and development program
Contact the Trails and Waterways Unit area supervisor for more information.
2. Fishing pier and shore fishing program - Applications submitted throughout
the year. Proposals are reviewed on site and ranked in the Fall with the
highest priorities selected for installation for the following summer.
Program Purpose: These programs provide financial and technical assistance to local governments
to improve water recreation facilities including; public boat accesses, fishing
piers, shore fishing and rivers recreation amenities.
How it works: The DNR works with local units of governments and provides technical and
financial assistance to improve water recreation opportunities. Typically the
local unit of government owns the property and the DNR cooperates in the
development.
Eligible Projects: Projects that improve access to public water. It includes acquisition,
development and rehabilitation of water recreation facilities. Projects involve
site design to improve, parking, boat ramps, landscape restoration, docks and
accessibility for people with disabilities. Shore fishing projects include pier
installation and/or shoreline improvements.
Eligible applicants: Counties, cities, and townships.
Priorities: Projects are selected based on criteria which include but are not limited to the
following: public demand, locations, present availability of facilities, game fish
present, size of water body, accessability, and sponsor donation.
Grant amount: Grant amounts vary for access development and shore fishing projects. Fishing
piers are up to $20,000 per project depending on the size of the pier determined
to be appropriate for the water body.
Local Match: Match amounts for accesses are negotiable based on present availability and
need in the area. The level financial assistance fluctuates considerably
depending on the project scope, sponsor's need and the program's available
budget. Piers are ranked statewide with the amount of match being one criteria
for ranking.
Contact: Please contact the Trails and Waterways Area Supervisor for your location as
listed on the back side of this page.
DNR Trails and Waterways Unit
Area Supervisor contacts
Area I A - Dick Kimball (218) 755 -3972
2115 Birchmont Beach Road Northeast
Bemidji, Minnesota 56601
Area I - Bruce Winterfeldl (218) 739 -7447
1221 Fir Avenue East
Fergus Falls, Minnesota 56537
Area 2A - Bob Moore (218) 3274240
1201 East Highway 2
Grand Rapids, Minnesota 55744
Area 2B - Ann Bjorgo (218) 753 -6256
Box 388
Tower, Minnesota 55790
Area 2C - Tom Peterson (218) 834 -6622
120 Stale Road
Two Harbors, Minnesota 55616
Area 3 - Forrest Boe (218) 828 -2690
1601 Minnesota Drive
Brainerd, Minnesota 56401
Area 3B - Scott Schroeder (320) 255 -2971
4140 Thielman Lane, Suite 203
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56302
Area 3C- Kevin Arends (218) 485 -5410
Route 2 - 701 Kenwood
Moose Lake, Minnesota 55767
Area 4A - Gregg Soupir (320) 796 -6281
P.O. Box 457
Spicer, Minnesota 56288
Area 4B - Bob Chance (507) 831 -2918
Rural Route 2 - Box 245
Windom, Minnesota 56101
Area 4C - Bob Kaul (507) 359 -6067
261 - 1lighway 15 South
New Ulm, Minnesota 56073
•
Area 5A - Joel Wagar (507) 280 -5062
2300 Silver Creek Road N.E.
Rochester, Minnesota 55906
Area 5B - Craig Blommer (507) 280 -5061
2300 Silver Creek Road N.E.
Rochester, Minnesota 55903
Area 6A - Martha Reger (612) 832 - 6170
9925 Valley View Road
Valley View Business Center
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Area 6B - Scott Kelling(651) 772 -7937
1200 Warner Road
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55106
DNR Central Office
Michael McDonough (651) 297 -2798
Water Recreation Program Coordinator
500 Lafayette Road
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55106
E -mail adresses:
first name.last name@dnr.state.mn.us
Y f
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 • (612) 474 -3236
FAX (612) 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityha11 @ci.shorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
James C. Hurm, City Administrator
FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
DATE: December 14, 1999
RE: Freeman Park Multipurpose Building
The following is a tentative time schedule for design and bidding of the Freeman Park Multipurpose
* Building:
Review Concept Drawings Park Commission December 14, 1999
90% Review submittal and preparation of estimate
100% Package Plans, Specifications & Estimate
City Council Review and Approval Plans, Specifications
And estimate, authorize advertisement of bids
Open Bids
City Council Awards Contract
January 25, 2000
February 9, 2000
February 14, 2000
March 8, 2000
March 13, 2000
• PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
r Ltl, 14 - 1yyy lb��' Wbd & HbWUHItb LNU. b1dZ)411YWW 1 Ifdl
Covington Road and Vine Hill Road
Pedestrian Pathways
• Project Schedule
Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications ............. October, 1999
PIanning Commission Presentation ........... . . „ ....... December 14, 1999
Receive PIanning Commission Comments .............. January 11, 1999
Public Information Meeting ............ January 25, 2000
Approve Plans and Specifications / Order Ad for Bid ........ February 14, 2000
Receive Bids .. ............. March 15, 2000
Award Contract ......... ............................... March 27, 2000
Begin Construction ...................................... April 17, 2000
Complete Bituminous Paving ............... June 9, 2000
0 Construction Completion ... ............................... June 16, 2000
• P%WPWIMI 19Q.M12t4"4r;xchrw0
TOTAL P.02