Loading...
033098 CC/Park Comm Joint SP Min . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCILIPARK COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION MEETING MONDA Y, MARCH 30, 1998 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCILIP ARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Puzak called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. A. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Dahlberg; Councilmembers Stover, O'Neill and Garfunkel; Chair Puzak; Commissioners Colopoulos, Bensman, Dallman, Arnst, Themig and Cochran; Planning Commissioner Roger Champa; Administrator Jim Hurm Councilmember McCarty Absent: B. REVIEW AGENDA Chair Puzak reviewed the agenda and it was accepted as presented. 2. MEET .TOINTL Y WITH BILL MORRIS. DECISION RESOURCES. IN C.. TO DISCUSS PARK AND TRAIL SURVEY QUESTIONS Diane Traxler and Bill Morris, Decision Resources, Inc., were in attendance. The proposed survey questionnaire was distributed and reviewed by the City Council and Park Commission. Mr. Morris explained the revised questionnaire reflects the changes and deletions which were suggested after a review of the preliminary questionnaire. He suggested discussing the changes which were made as well as the items which were retained in the survey. Mr. Morris stated he would like to review and discuss approximately 25 percent of the revisions which were requested, but not ultimately incorporated into the survey. PAGE NO. 1 Mr. Morris explained Paragraph 1 has been worded in a way which will provide an effective way of ensuring the individual respondent will continue on the telephone. He noted over the years, various introductions have been tested to ensure participation on the part of the respondent and, therefore, sentence two of this paragraph was retained in this introduction. It had been suggested that Question No. 1 be included in the demographics section of the ~urvey. Mr. Morris explained this particular question is asked at the beginning of the survey as an ice breaker since it is a question everyone can answer and he felt it is needed for continuity. Commissioner Bensman inquired whether any sort of screening is performed to eliminate a particular respondent from the survey. Mr. Morris stated the telephone staff have been instructed to eliminate anyone under the age of 18. A random selection is utilized and this is based on one of two procedures, either asking for birth dates of all adult residents in the household over the age of 18 or asking for the youngest male in the household over the age of 18 or the oldest female in the household over the age of 18. . . . CITY COUNCILIPARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES MARCH 30, 1998 - PAGE 2 Councilmember O'Neill expressed concern relative to Question No. 1 and the possibility a respondent who has possibly lived in Shorewood for a shorter period of time would feel their input would not be utilized. Mr. Morris explained Question Nos. 2 and 3 are utilized to ascertain the attitude of residents relative to rating the quality of life and what is important to them. These questions also serve as a measure to determine which groups see the amenities of trails as being an integral part of the quality of life in the community. Mayor Dahlberg asked whether Question No.2 could be answered in absolute terms since it would be unknown to what the respondent is comparing the quality of life in Shorewood. He did not feel this to be an objective measure of the quality of life in Shorewood, but simply an attitude indicator. Mayor Dahlberg felt it would be accurate to describe this question as an attitude. Councilmember Garfunkel asked how a negative response relative to the quality of life in Shorewood would correlate to other responses which are given throughout the survey. Mr. Morris explained the results will be cross tabulated to determine the reason for a particular answer. Councilmember Stover inquired why a question is not included relative to what a respondent least likes in Shorewood. Mr. Morris pointed out this question had been deleted from the preliminary questions which had been submitted for review by the Park Commission and City Council. Councilmember Stover felt this question would give a respondent the opportunity to let the City know what they do not like. Ms. Traxler felt this to be an excellent question to be incorporated into this particular survey. Chair Puzak felt there to be value to both questions, noting the question relative to what a respondent likes least in the City would provide goals for the future. The consensus of the group was to incorporate the question, "What do you like least, if anything, about living in Shorewood?" Mayor Dahlberg suggested rewording Question No.3 to read, "What do you like most about living in Shorewood, if anything?" And it was decided this change should be made to keep the questions parallel. With respect to the specific parks, the telephoners will be allowed, if asked, to indicate Badger Park is located next to City Hall. Chair Puzak pointed out some of the parks are neighborhood parks and may not be known to all of the residents. Mr. Morris suggested including locations along with the name of the park. PAGE NO.2 Commissioner Arnst recalled that in asking questions regarding trails, the LRT would not be involved. She asked how the City can be sure respondents are not responding to the LRT when being asked questions relative to the trail. Chair Puzak pointed out Freeman Park is the only park with a network of trails contained within the park. Commissioner Bensman suggested possibly adding concession stands to the survey. Chair Puzak was in favor of this, noting this is a part of the Park Commission's agenda. Therefore, it was suggested concession stands be added as Item 18a. Chair Puzak suggested referring to "concessions stands at Freeman Park" and "trails at Freeman Park." Councilmember Stover pointed out a number of children utilize Manor Park simply as a yard as opposed to utilizing the equipment and fields. Ms. Traxler suggested adding an item "Other." Council member Garfunkel felt this situation would be true of a number of the parks. CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES MARCH 30, 1998 - PAGE 3 . Mr. Morris suggested adding Item 18b, "Grassy areas for leisure activities" and this was accepted by the group. Administrator Hurm inquired whether Item No. 15 should include a reference to softball and baseball fields. Commissioner Themig questioned whether the goal was to determine whether the residents use these items or to ascertain their impression of the quality. Chair Puzak explained one of the purposes of this section of the survey was determine how much or how often the residents use items such as tennis courts. He noted, for example, a tennis court would involve high capital and high maintenance costs. Administrator Hurm recalled the group had discussed a rewording of this section to determine which facilities the respondent would use if they were more available in the parks. Commissioner Themig felt the group had been looking for more content to this particular question. Ms. Traxler suggested asking the respondents to rate the facilities they actually use by excellent, good, fair or poor. Commissioner Bensman felt the group had discussed this to be more of a value question, pointing out a respondent may feel a particular facility is valuable even though they may never use them at all. . Commissioner Bensman suggested first asking whether the facilities are used or not and, secondly, whether the respondent feels the facilities are valuable. Ms. Traxler stated this could be done and the results cross tabbed. Chair Puzak noted the group would be looking for an indication of usage and value. It was decided value will be asked of each of the items listed. Mr. Morris suggested, "Whether you use them or not, please tell me how valuable you think it is for a community to offer these types of facilities. Would you say very valuable, somewhat valuable, not too valuable or not at all valuable," and then the telephoner would proceed through the list. With respect to Question No. 20 and concerns raised by Mayor Dahlberg, Mr. Morris suggested rewording this question to reflect, "In particular, do you or members of your household regularly use trails in other cities?" Commissioner Bensman felt Question No. 21 to actually be two questions. Chair Puzak noted his agreement. Commissioner Arnst felt the question contradicts itself in that land is not preserved for ball fields, but rather it is developed. Ms. Traxler suggested deleting the words "preserved" and "developed." Commissioner Bensman suggested the first question ask, "If the City of Shorewood should acquire presently undeveloped land for recreational purposes?" Chair Puzak suggested the first question be, "Should the City of Shorewood acquire additional land space for recreation for parks?" The second question could be, "If the City of Shorewood had land, would you like to see it developed into organized ball fields or left natural?" Mayor Dahlberg asked whether the Council and the Park Commission are actually interested in acquiring more space for the parks. He stated he was under the impression the City is not interested in acquiring additional space. Chair Puzak did not feel anyone knows the answer to that particular question. . Commissioner Colopoulos felt it would behoove the City to ask questions of a specific nature relative to acquiring trails, green space, or additional ball fields given the expense involved in a trail project. Chair Puzak felt it important to ask whether the residents feel there is enough park land in the community. He did not feel it would be beneficial to address what to do with any additional land since the City has not acquired additional land. . . . CITY COUNCILIPARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES MARCH 30, 1998 - PAGE 4 Commissioner Colopoulos felt there should be a balance of similar scale projects, not by price, but by comparison based on the range of the scale being considered. Commissioner Bensman was in favor of asking whether the City should consider acquiring additional park land without making specific suggestions for use of any potential property. Commissioner Themig felt Question No. 21 should be asked prior to Question No. 19. The group was in agreement with this. With respect to Question No. 22, Councilmember Garfunkel expressed concern relative to asking questions about the quality of life in that it is not a definable term and could be influenced by a respondent's activities on the day the survey is taken. Mayor Dahlberg asked how a respondent could measure the affect a trail system would have on the quality of life if they do not know what the trail system actually is. He pointed out at this time, the trail system is very abstract. Mr. Morris suggested moving Question Nos. 34 and 35 directly after Question No.2!. Prior to any discussion of trails, the respondent would be asked what they see as the major benefit or the major positive of a trail system and what, if anything, would be seen as the major negative or major concern. The group was in agreement with this. Question No. 22 will be deleted. PAGE NO.3 Commissioner Themig pointed out not everyone understands what a trail is and noted the phrase "shared use path" has been used in the past. He asked whether there should be a definition included which would clarify this to the respondent. Ms. Traxler felt the opening paragraph defines a trail as a connected citywide trail system in which residents could use the trails for recreation and for traveling. Commissioner Themig expressed concern respondents will relate trails to the LRT. Ms. Traxler suggested the telephoners be allowed to state as often as necessary, "We are not addressing the LRT traiL" Councilmember Stover explained the term "trail" has a negative impact because the trail which is available within the City is the LRT trail. She suggested the telephoners be allowed to say there is no similarity to the current LRT trail. With respect to Question No. 23, Mayor Dahlberg felt there should be a third option in which a respondent could state they are not in favor of either option. Mr. Morris suggested utilizing the paragraph indicating the differentiation of the LRT trail with a question asking, "Would you favor or oppose the development of a trail system in the City of Shorewood?" This would be followed by, a question relative to if the City of Shorewood were to consider developing a trail system in the community, would the respondent have a preference between the two options, or do they not care. This would answer the question of whether a particular respondent would support or oppose the development of a trail system. Mayor Dahlberg felt this question would lock a respondent into assuming this is going to be something that they are going to like or not like and they do not know. Councilmember O'Neill pointed out this assumes a trail would be citywide when it may just be in a particular area. Mayor Dahlberg inquired whether an answer could be determined in a more expeditious fashion by conceptualizing this product research and dealing with features and then adjusting the methodology accordingly. Chair Puzak stated if this issue were approached with a finished product and visualization of a perceived trail system, there would be consideration objection by the residents. CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES MARCH 30, 1998 - PAGE 5 . Ms. Traxler stated product research would require a product and pointed out at this time there is not a product with which everyone agrees. She suggested adding a follow up question to whether or not the respondent would support a trail system in Shorewood asking them the reason for their feeling. Mr. Morris suggested the following wording: "W ould you favor or oppose the development of a trail system in the City of Shorewood?" "Do you feel strongly that way?" "Could you tell me one or two reasons why you feel that way?" The group reached consensus on this matter. Chair Puzak noted Clay Atkins has requested the following be added to the survey: "If the City were to add a trail, where would you see that trail located?" followed by, "Why?" or "Why not?" Ms. Traxler stated the why or why not questions have been answered in several ways, however, the question of where has not been addressed. Councilmember Garfunkel felt this was again getting too specific. In addition, Mr. Atkins suggested asking, "How do you feel about a trail or trails to allow access to elementary schools?" Chair Puzak felt this question would also be getting into details and specifics. He pointed out the Park Commission had agreed not to address details at this point, but to take more of a value approach to determine whether this issue should be pursued. Commissioner Bensman requested the wording in Question No. 24 be changed to reflect "a trail" as opposed to "the traiL" It was also agreed anyone answering Question No. 25 would be asked Question Nos. 26 through 31 since participation on the trail system may not always be recreational. . With respect to Question No. 32 which asks how close to the respondent's residence a trail would need to be for the respondent to use it, Mr. Morris suggested terms of time it would take to get to the trail could be utilized rather than distances. Mayor Dahlberg would be interested in reviewing this suggestion. Councilmember Stover felt distance may be a better measure when looking at the issue of children utilizing a trail to travel to school. She was in favor of using the measure of distance as opposed to time. The consensus of the group was to utilize the measure of distance. PAGE NO.4 With respect to demographics, Ms. Traxler explained the household composition will be cross tabbed with the respondents' reactions. She stated the two most important factors to be age and household composition, however, educational level is often utilized. She explained education level is connected with health and well being, interconnected with exercise. Consensus of the group was to include a question relative to education. Mayor Dahlberg expressed his appreciate to Ms. Traxler and Mr. Morris for their work on the survey questionnaire. Ms. Traxler stated they will return with a revised questionnaire. Commissioner Champa raised the issue of permanent restroom facilities at Freeman Park and suggested this be included in the survey. Councilmember Garfunkel suggested, "What facilities do you feel are missing from the park?" Councilmember Stover supported this question in that it would bring to light any other facilities the respondent might feel are necessary. Commissioner Colopoulos again felt there should be a balance of similar scale projects, not by price, but by comparison based on the range of the scale being considered. He felt projects of similar magnitude should be compared to determine community interest. . . . . . CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES MARCH 30, 1998 - PAGE 6 Commissioner Cochran felt with the amount of money proposed, the residents should be aware there are options to maybe not spend the funds on a trail system. Councilmember O'Neill suggested, "Given the limited resources of the City, would you prefer to see a trail or other options?" Councilmember Stover was in favor of this as long as the question is left open for the ~esident. Chair Puzak was opposed to this in that it opens the matter up to a number of other Issues. Chair Puzak questioned given similar costs, whether the City Council would like the Park Commission to develop a trail system or acquire additional green space. Mayor Dahlberg stated another option would be not to expend any funds at all. Ms. Traxler suggested a list of projects which some cities have undertaken for their communities and then asking the respondent to rank them. It was decided the options utilized will be green space, trails, a swimming pool, as well as an in-line skate park. 3. ADJOURNMENT Chair Puzak adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Cheryl Wallat Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. ATTEST: ?