Loading...
052798 PK MINCITY OF SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, MAY 27, 1998 MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 6:00 P.M. Vice Chair Dallman called the meeting to order at 6:07 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Puzak (arrived at 7:00); Commissioners, Dallman, Arnst, Bensman and Themig; Administrator Jim Hurm, Council Liaison Roger Champa, Mark Koegler Absent: Commissioners Colopoulos and Cochran Also present: Bill Morse of Decision Resources B. Review Agenda Administrator Hurm explained that he and Mark Koegler talked regarding the status of the Citizens Review Group. The first fifty letters sent out to residents and followed up with a phone call only resulted in two residents that said they would participate. It was then followed -up with another fifty letters sent out and followed up with a phone call from which only four residents agreed to participate. Mr. Koegler explained that the follow -up phone call response from several residents was that this is a tough time of the year. Mr. Koegler stated that six residents are not enough for the Citizens Review Group. Mr. Koegler suggested that we try in October, carry over the six people that agreed to participate and explain to them the situation and go back to the same 100 again and seek volunteers at that point because of the response from the follow -up phone calls. The goal is to have a minimum of twelve to fifteen participants, twenty would be nice. Themig moved, Bensman seconded that the Park Commission table the Citizen Review Group until late September and invitations be sent out early September. Bensman stated that she would like to see the invitation go out in August so that residents can get those dates on their calendar. Themig amended motion to say that the invitations go out in August. Approved 3/1 ( Arnst opposed). 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of May 12, 1998 PARK COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 27, 1998 - PAGE 2 Corrections made as follows: Page 3, paragraph 5, changed to read "Chair Puzak asked if there could be "center car here" posts at the parking lot on Eureka. Page 4, paragraph 2, last sentence should read: If there is any money left, consensus was to keep it in Cathcart and put it towards a magic square on the basketball court. Page 4, paragraph 4, draft of CIP, not working CIP should be added. Page 4, paragraph 5, Cochran should be taken out of sentence. Page 5, paragraph 8, Diane should be Diana. Page 5, paragraph 10, change "wants to discuss next year" to "wants to have in place for next year ". Page 6, paragraph 5 should go after paragraph 6. Arnst moved, Themig seconded to approve the minutes as amended. Motion passed 4/0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR None 4. REPORTS A. Bill Morse, Decision Resources, LTD Will Present a Summary of the Park and Trail Survey Including Cross Tabs Attached to and made part of these minutes is the park and trail telephone survey and graphs from Decision Resources, LTD. Bill Morse went over the highlights of the telephone survey and graphs. He stated that they spoke to three hundred residents. The refusal rate was about 3 1/2 %, very, very small when the people understood that they were not trying to sell anything. They broke the ice by asking general questions such as "Quality of life in Shorewood ". 96% felt that the quality of life was either excellent or good, with 57% saying excellent. This places Shorewood as the number three community in the entire metro area, in terms of perception by its residents. Mr. Morse stated that the 57% figure is only four points lower than the top score of 61% that they have seen in ten years of surveys. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 27, 1998 - PAGE 3 What people least liked about living in Shorewood was number one, taxes, 22 %. The figure of 22% is lower than the neighboring communities. Minnetonka at 35 %, Chanhassen in over 40 %. 20% said there was nothing that they didn't like about Shorewood. In most suburban communities this has dropped off. The norm currently in the metro area is 7 %. Shorewood is about three times higher then the norm. 20% is a very good score. Two issues that came up as moderate concern was growth and traffic. These were at 9% and 10 %. Commissioner Themig asked if it was traffic in town or if it was getting here. Mr. Morse stated that it is congested streets. Those that thought it would be the commute would have said distance to the cities or the amount of time getting to the cities. People that are concerned about the commute would be in the "distance to the cities" category. Commissioner Arnst asked where the questions "Direction of the City" came from. Mr. Morse stated that this should have been deleted. It was a mistake and should not of been on there. 65% have visited a park at least once this year. This is a very high usage rate in comparison with most areas. Freeman park is the most utilized park. In general those that are using the parks evaluate of each of the parks outstanding. Some of the negative responses (which is a very small percentage) were maintenance and upkeep and lack of facilities. The maintenance and upkeep tended to be the most talked about in the resident's responses. The three items that people are using the most in the parks are: 69 %- grassy areas, 67 %- playground equipment, 66 %- trails at Freeman. The trails were the key draw by people in other parts of the city in the use of Freeman park. The value of park facilities is overwhelmingly favorable. Grassy areas and playground areas rate as a positive value. Commissioner Bensman asked if they have the responses to these questions. Mr. Morse stated that they do. Next was recreational development priorities of residents. Residents indicated that trails were their first or second priority. The top priority is trails and the second priority would be open space. Mr. Morse stated that half the residents are going elsewhere for recreation. 14% are leaving to go to other parks, 10% to other trails and 7% to swimming pools. Question "are you using trails elsewhere ", the answer was yes, 43 %. Mr. Morse explained that in the four or five communities where they have asked this question the norm is 29 %. It does show that there is interest in the community for using trails. People are making a distinction between parks and trails. People were asked if they would like to see the undeveloped land stay that way or see it become a recreation area. When asked this question they specifically asked if trails were included in that as recreation areas. The phoners said that that was not one of the options given. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 27, 1998 - PAGE 4 Positive response for trails was 40 %. They like the idea of being accessible. There was a very low percentage for those seeing nothing positive at all about trails in comparison with other cities. 51% said that they see nothing negative about trails. The types of things people saw as negative were maintenance, location, snowmobiles on trails, safety and crime, dogs and messes, negative impact on nature, and road crossings. Respondants 18 -44 years old were strongly supportive of trails linked to or adjacent to them. Over the age of 44 tended to be less enthusiastic. The Not In My Back Yard ( NIMBY) problem is not concentrated in one area, it is spread out. In other communities NIMBY was a concern. Mr. Morse stated that NIMBY would not be a crippling issue. Strong opposition of 19% indicates NIMBY comes into play for about 1 and 5 people. They become concerned when those strongly opposed is double that level. When you start getting to half then you have a fairly devastating issue on your hands. Mr. Morse stated that they did explore on the pre -test what the residents thought "adjacent" meant for trails. The pre -test indicated that it meant along their property line. Out of the 300 respondents about 100 opposed adjacent trails to their property. Residents Carmel Rehmalt and Theresa Zerby were present. Ms. Rehmalt stated that she was walking down Howards Point Road, and she counted in less then a mile 30 people walking and motorists trying to pass around them. She stated that this is dangerous and that trails would better serve Shorewood. After going over the survey it was discussed that the Citizens Review process should be re- addressed. This issue should not wait until September. Consensus was not to wait until September /October but to continue and try to recruit volunteers. Motion to be reconsidered. Arnst moved, Bensman seconded to send out another 150 letters randomly selected by Bill Morse of Decision Resources and schedule three meetings in July and to attempt to keep the six volunteers that we already have. Arnst amended motion to three meetings in July or sooner thereafter as feasible Bensman seconded. Motion passed 510. 5. OLD BUSINESS Commissioner Themig asked that Items 5 and 6 be tabled until the next meeting and move on the park tours. Commissioner Arnst asked that the role of the new liaison be explained. Chair Puzak explained that the liaison position is to carry first hand information to the City Council, what the motion was and what has been passed. The Liaison has a deeper knowledge of what was discussed at PARK COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 27, 1998 - PAGE 5 meetings and work sessions. Chair Puzak explained that the Park Commission may need the liaison's input. Themig motioned, Arnst seconded to table items 5 and 6 until the next meeting and go on the park tours. Motion passed 510. 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT TO PARK TOURS The meeting adjourned at 7:27 p.m. to go on the park tours. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Twila Grout Park Secretary • 1 DECISION RESOURCES, LTD. CITY OF SHOREWOOD 3128 Dean Court RESIDENTIAL STUDY Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 FINAL VERSION • Hello, I'm of Decision Resources, Ltd., a survey research firm located in Minneapolis. We've been retained by the City of Shorewood to speak with a random sample of residents about parks and trails. I want to assure you that all individual responses will be held strictly confidential; only summaries of the entire sample will be reported. (DO NOT PAUSE) 1. How long have you lived in the TWO YEARS OR LESS ...... 8% City of Shorewood? 2.1 TO 5.0 YEARS ...... 18% 5.1 TO 10.0 YEARS ..... 29% 10.1 TO 20.0 YEARS .... 20% OVER TWENTY YEARS ..... 24% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ..... 0% 2.. How would you rate the quality of EXCELLENT.. . .57% life in Shorewood -- excellent, GOOD........... .39% good, only fair, or poor? ONLY FAIR ..............3% POOR ............. ....0% DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 0% 3. What do you like most about living DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ..... 1% in Shorewood, if anything? NOTHING ................2a LOCATION ..............25% NEIGHBORHOOD ........... 8% • PEOPLE ...... ............3% QUIET. .18% SAFE ...................4% LAKE .................14o SMALL TOWN FEEL ....... 12% SIZE OF LOTS ........... 4% COUNTRY ATMOSPHERE ..... 6% PARKS/TRAILS ........... 3% SCATTERED ..............lo 4. And, what do you like least about DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 6% living in Shorewood, if anything? NOTHING ...............20% GROWTH .................90 TAXES .................22% TRAFFIC ...............10% SCHOOLS ................1% POLITICS ON COUNCIL .... 7% CITY WATER .............6% NEED MORE PARK /TRAILS..S% DISTANCE FROM CITIES ... 6% STREET MAINTENANCE ..... 3% PEOPLE .................1% ZONING REGULATIONS ..... i SCATTERED ..............3% • 1 r ° The Shorewood Park System is composed of four neighborhood parks -- Badger, Cathcart, Manor, and Silverwood Parks -- and one large community park -- Freeman Park. For each of the following parks, please tell me which, if any, have members of your household used • during the past year? (IF "USED," ASK:) How would you rate the park and recreational facilities in that park? (ROTATE) NOT USE EXC GOO FAI POO USE DKR 5. Badger Park, located by City Hall? 20 130 40 00 800 20 6. Cathcart Park, located on Church Road by the border with the City of Chanhassen? 30 150 60 00 740 20 7. Manor Park, located at Manor Road and Suburban Drive? 30 120 30 00 79% 3% 8. Silverwood Park, located at Covington Road and Old market Road? 3% 130 20 00 790 3% 9. Freeman Park, located off of Eureka Road? 21% 250 16 Os 516 20 IF "ONLY FAIR" OR "POOR" IS POSTED FOR ANY PARK(S), ASK: (N =36) 10. Why do you feel that way? • POOR MAINTENANCE /UPKEEP, 47%; NOT ENOUGH FACILITIES, 390; TOO SMALL, 11%; SCATTERED, 30. IF HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS USED ANY PARK, ASK: (N =196) For each of following facilities in the Shorewood Parks, please tell me if you or members of your household use them.... (ROTATE) YES NO DKR 11. Grassy areas for leisure activities? 690 310 l6 12. Playground equipment? 670 330 00 13. Picnicing facilities? 416 590 00 14. Tennis courts? 336 650 26 15. Basketball courts? 320 686 06 16. volleyball courts? 116 890 06 17. Baseball and Softball fields? 470 536 00 18. Soccer and Football fields? 400 60% 06 19. Trails at Freeman Park? 66% 346 00 20. Skating and Hockey rinks? 456 530 26 21. Concession Stand at Freeman Park? 330 666 26 • 2 n U Now, I would like to (re -) read you a list of facilities in Shore- wood Parks. Whether you use them or not, please tell me how valuable you think it is for a community to offer that facility -- very valuable, somewhat valuable, not too valuable, or not at all valuable? (ROTATE) VRV SMV NTV NAA DKR • 22. Grassy areas for leisure activities? 66t 30t 3t Os It 23. Playground equipment? 71t 26t It It It 24. Picnicing facilities? 42t 45t 9t 2t to 25. Tennis courts? 330 45t 15t 5t It 26. Basketball courts? 32t 470 13t 5t 2t 27. Volleyball courts? 270 45t 170 80 20 28. Baseball and Softball fields? 57t 350 50 30 It 29. Soccer and Football fields? 48t 360 9t 4t 3t 30. Trails at Freeman Park? 570 260 60 20 8t 31. Skating and Hockey rinks? 48t 39t 6t 4t 2t 32. Concession Stand at Freeman Park? 21t 42t 14t 13t llt I would like to read you a short list of six types of recreation- al developments. Hypothetically, suppose each would cost approx- imately the same amount of funds and no property tax increases were necessary.... 33. Which one, if any, would you choose as your top priority? 34. And, which one, if any, would be your second priority? FIRST SECND OUTDOOR MUNICIPAL SWIMMING POOL 150 80 TRAILS 420 25t ICE ARENA 60 90 SET -ASIDE LAND FOR OPEN SPACE 210 260 IN -LINE SKATING PARR 4t 110 ADDITIONAL BALLFIELDS 50 llt All equally (vol) 20 20 None of above (vol) 40 St Don't Know /Refused 10 2 0 1 C` Moving on.... 35. Does the City of Shorewood cur- yES ...................870 rently have sufficient park land NO .....................90 to meet the needs of your house - DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 4t hold? 3 36. Do you or members of your house - DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 0% hold regularly use leisure -time No ....................52% recreational facilities or pro- SWIMMING POOL.......... 7% • grams in other cities? (IF "YES," TRAILS ......10% ASK:) What types of facilities HEALTH CLUB ............ .4% or programs are you using in these GOLF COURSES ........... 3% other cities? PARKS ................. 14% COMMUNITY CENTER....... 2% BALLFIELDS .............1% TENNIS COURTS .......... 3% ICE RINK ...............2% SCATTERED ..............1% 37. In particular, do you or members YES ...................43% of your household regularly use NO ....................56% trails in other cities? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ..... lt 38. If there were undeveloped land in UNDEVELOPED /STRONGLY..45% the community, would you prefer UNDEVELOPED ........... 20% it to remain undeveloped or would RECREATIONAL .......... 11% you prefer it to become recrea- RECREATIONAL /STRONGLY.11 tional areas, such as athletic DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.... 130 fields or playgrounds? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? Moving on..... In the following questions you will be asked for your opinions about trails in the community. Please keep in mind that this discussion has nothing to do with the current LRT trail which goes through the City of Shorewood. 39. What, if anything, do you see as the major positive of trails in the community? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED, 3 5 o; EXERCISE, 40%; RECREATION, 11 %; SAFETY /OFF THE MAIN ROADS, 19%; KEEP NATURE, 8%; ACCES- SIBILITY, 8%; GOOD FOR FAMILIES, 4 NOTHING, 3% SCAT- TERED, 2t. 40. And, what, if anything, do you see as the negative of trails in the community? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED, 10 NOTHING, 51 %; MAINTENANCE COSTS, 6 LOCATION TO PRIVATE PROPERTY, 6 SNOWMOBILES, 6 %; SAFETY /CRIME, 8%; DOG MESSES, 3%; NEGATIVE IMPACT ON NATURE, 2%; ROAD CROSSING DANGERS, 1%; TOO MANY PEOPLE WILL USE, 1%; SCATTERED, 6%. • 4 • 41. Would you favor or oppose the City STRONGLY FAVOR........ 54$ of Shorewood providing trails in FAVOR .................27% the community? (WAIT FOR RE- OPPOSE .................7% SPONSE) Do you feel strongly STRONGLY OPPOSE........ 5% that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ..... 7k IF A POSITION IS TAKEN, ASK: (N= 280) 42. Could you tell me one or two reasons why you feel that way? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED, ld COSTS, 5s; USE TRAILS, 10a; RECREATION, 24$; SAFETY /OFF THE MAIN ROADS, 130; NEEDED, 90; KEEP NATURE, 8 *; GOOD FOR FAMILIES, 14%; DEPENDS ON LOCATION, 6t; USE FOR TRAVEL, 2t; NOT NEEDED, 5t; SCATTERED, 4- • If the City of Shorewood were to consider providing trails in the community, one option might be for the City to develop a connect- ed citywide trail system, in which residents could use the trails for recreation and for traveling throughout the community. Another option might be for the city to develop a series of non - connected trail links solely for recreational purposes. 43. Which of the following statements most closely reflects your opin- ion: A) I would strongly prefer a city- wide connected trail system; B) I would strongly prefer non - connected trail links; C) I would have no strong prefer- ences and would support either option; D) I would oppose both options. STATEMENT A...........480 STATEMENT B............90 STATEMENT C...........28% STATEMENT D ........... llo DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 4t If trails were developed in the City of Shorewood.... 44. How likely would you or members of VERY LIKELY ........... 580 your household be to use a trail SOMEWHAT LIKELY....... 210 -- very likely, somewhat likely, NOT TOO LIKELY ......... 81 not too likely, or not at all NOT AT ALL LIKELY ..... 120 likely? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... 1% IF "VERY LIKELY" OR "SOMEWHAT LIKELY," ASK: (N =236) 45. Would you and /or members of RECREATIONAL .......... 55t your household use the trail TRAVELING ..............2'1 primarily for recreational BOTH ..................43% activities, for traveling DON'T KNOW /REFUSED..... Oa within the City, or for both? 5 d •. Which of the following recreational activities would you or members of your household participate in on the trail sys- tem.... (ROTATE) • YES NO DKR 46. Rollerblading? 33 1 k 66% 1%_ 47. Bicycling? 86% 13!k Vk 48. Walking and Hiking? 98!k 2g 0!k 49. Jogging? 520 47% 2t 50. Cross - Country skiing? 48% 49!k 3k 51. Something else? 90 89% 2s 52. How close to your residence would a trail need to be for you to use it -- in your front yard, across the street, down the block, up to 3 blocks away, or could it be over a quarter of a mile away? • • WOULD NOT USE.......... 7g FRONT YARD .............2 ACROSS STREET .......... 10 DOWN THE BLOCK ........ 12v UP TO 3 BLOCKS........ 260 QUARTER MILE AWAY......470 DON'T KNOW .............4. REFUSED ................1% 53. Would you support or oppose a STRONGLY SUPPORT...... 220 trail link in your area if the SUPPORT ...............33% trail were to run adjacent to your OPPOSE ................160 property? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do STRONGLY OPPOSE....... 190 you feel strongly that way? DON'T KNOW /REFUSED.... 100 Now, just a few more questions for demographic purposes.... 54. What is your age, please? Stop me 18- 24 ..................30 when I read the interval which 25- 34 ..................80 contains it. 35- 44 ................. 31!k 45- 54 .................260 55- 64 .................160 65 AND OVER ........... 15% REFUSED ................O. 55. What is the highest level of formal education you completed? HIGH SCHOOL OR LESS .... 4t HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE..IOo VO- TECH /TECH COLLEGE ... 8o SOME COLLEGE .......... 14a COLLEGE GRADUATE ...... 5Oo POST-GRADUATE ......... 14a REFUSED ................0% Could you tell me how many people in each of the following age groups live in your household -- be sure to include yourself.... 56. First, persons over 65 years old? NONE ..................78s ONE ...................12% TWO OR MORE ........... 100 6 57. Other adults, under 65 years old? NONE ..................13t ONE............ ..19 %' TWO ...................60$ • THREE OR MORE.......... 7t 58. School-aged children? NONE. .........60t ONE ...................18t TWO ...................16%- THREE OR MORE ... ....... 6t 59. Pre - schoolers? NONE ..................84t ONE ............. ....13t TWO OR MORE ............ 30 60. Gender (BY OBSERVATION) MALE ..................49t FEMALE ................510 61. Area of the City PRECINCT ONE.......... 230 PRECINCT TWO.......... 46% PRECINCT THREE AND FOUR......... 320 u • 7 City of Shorewood Rc Quality of Life Rating Excellent 67 41p --ly Fair 3 Good 39 Like Most about Shorewood Y �I Neighborhood 8 Loc*W 25 Lakes 141 ...... An—r3 ParkatTralls 3 :..d , 'un*Like 6 Small Town Feel 12 Safe 4 People 3 Shn; of Loftft 4 k OU1.1, 18 • 0 0 Most Serious Issue Council Polft. 7 Taxes 22 City Waer 8 More ParkaRrolls 6 row Traffic 1 o An Dishn -CIBes 6 ScaBerec Sleet Maintenance 3 Nothing 20 vror 8 6 irection of the Ci Rlghl Dlrectlon 71 Wrong 1 10 Park System Evaluations Badger Park Cathcart Park Manor Pen< It 24 SiW—d Park F,—an Park AT 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 ■Excellent Good Only Felr 0 0 0 Facilities Usage in Parks o f ., Grassy Press aa Playground Equipment 67 Picnicking Facilities 41 Tennis Courts 33 Basketball Courts 32 Volleyball Courts 11 Be sebell/Soltball Fields dY Soccer/Football Fields 40 Traile/Freeman Park 91 SkabngMOCkey Rinks 45 Concession Stand 33 0 10 20 40 50 60 70 60 �I- busehold Usage Value of Park Facilities Grassy Areas aa Playground Equipment :99 Plcnicl6ng Facilities Tennis Courts I9I,,8 pB Basketball Courts �7 Volleyball Courts 97 Baseball Fields 100 SoccemFootball Fields 1 47 Trails /Freeman Perk 91 SkaNng/Hockey Rinks 11i q7 Concession Stand 90 0 20 40 60 60 100 120 toVery V ®Somewhat Valuable a. im M.Not Too Valuable Not At All Valuable Recreational Development Priorities Outdoor Shimming Pool F3: Trails B Ice Arena Open Space da n {Ina Skabng Park Additional Ballfields Equally Non Unsure 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 BO Top Priority tlSacond Pdodly • • • Sufficient Park Land Y., 87 No 4 Unsure Use of Other Cities No Scattered conered 6 '2 cel' Tennis Courts ark. 14 Golf Courses 3 Fbakh Club 4 Swimming Pool 7 T rails III Use of Trails Elsewhere Y.. Be 0 0 0 Provide Trails in Community Strongly F- 64 su 7 Strongly Oppose 4 ..... 6 Favor 27 7 Type of Trail System Connected 48 28 Likelihood of Using Trail System Very Likely 68 Unsure I Not At All Likely 41 12 Somewhat Likely Not Too Likely 21 0 0 0 Uses of Trail System Recreatlonel 55 331 Rollelblatling B6 I eery slag 9g ­11119 WaIMngMlang 2 52 I Jogging 1 I 6otl1 x - counts Saing 43 aner Primary Purpose o 20 40 60 60 100 120 taRausemm�s Types of Uses of Trails Closeness of Trail for Use 7 Not Use 2 Front Yard Across Street i 12 Down Block Up to 3 Blocks 47 Quarter Mile 5 Unsur 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 ®Peroerdege Fbuseholda Trail Adjacent to Property „f Support Strongly Support 33 22 Unsure 10 Oppose 18 Strongly Oppose 19