Loading...
121499 PK MIN CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD PARK COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1999 7:30 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Co-chair Dallman called the meeting to order at 7:36 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Co-chairs Dallman and Arnst; Commissioner Puzak. (Commissioner Themig arrived at 8:12 p.m.); City Administrator Jim Hurm; City Engineer Larry Brown. Also Present: Park Planner Mark Koegler Absent: Commissioner Berndt, Councilmember Scott Zerby. B. Review Agenda There were no changes to the agenda. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of November 9, 1999 Due to lack of a quorum, approval of the Minutes was delayed until the expected arrival of Commissioner Themig. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were none. 4. DISCUSS FACILITATOR / SET DATE FOR JOINT MEETING WITH SPORTS ORGANIZATIONS Administrator Hurm provided background information on the plan to meet with Park Planner, Mark Koegler. The Commission began discussion of Mr. Koegler’s role as facilitator (rather than mediator) and what is hoped to be accomplished through the process. Mr. Koegler stated that he has reviewed the background material and agrees that the process needs a facilitator and that the presentation must be phrased in a positive way. He Park Commission December 14, 1999 –Page 2 believes that if the situation is explained in a rational manner to rational people they can come to an agreement and have support. He asked for feedback from the Commission and if they were of one mindset on the best process to use. He also asked if there were certain topics to avoid and how to structure the meeting. Commissioner Puzak said he is not sure that the problem is completely understood yet. He questioned whether the base level facility the City provides is the right level for the tax payers. Administrator Hurm pointed out that surveys taken over recent years have indicated that people are generally pleased with park facilities in Shorewood. He said the Commission is doing what they should be and he is not sure how they would get more information from citizens than they already have. Puzak raised the question of whether it is right to ask other organizations to follow the model of Little League and provide for themselves. Co-chair Arnst said this is the first time the Commission has had these actual numbers to work with. Presenting that information may open their eyes a bit. For example, when you see that only 30% of soccer players live in Shorewood, that goes against the argument that Shorewood should foot the bill. Puzak said he is supportive of the plan, but not sure yet if we know enough or figured out all of our options. His recommendation is to publish the data provided by staff and see if there is a way to then make people aware of the need. Koegler suggested if the Commission wants to take community input, they need to take it separately from the joint meeting. Any further investigation should be done ahead of time. In any case, the Park Commission must be united. Puzak said he can refer to past surveys for answers to some of his questions. He will review that and will probably get a sense of what he feels is missing. Co-chair Dallman asked if the information should be sent out with the meeting invitation for the sports representatives to preview. Koegler suggested that it may be better to present information to the group as a whole that night. The data will take a bit of explanation, and it is best to first give people some background with the presentation of facts and figures. Hurm suggested telling them we will try to limit the length of the meeting. Arnst suggested that the invitation be directed toward the organizations’ leaders and decision makers. Puzak added that those who attend need to be equipped to return to their boards and clearly present the information. There was discussion about whether to have some sort of agreement prepared and what to ask of each group. Puzak suggested they provide options for groups to consider and then return at a second meeting with their thoughts on how they can participate. Some ideas for a fee structure were mentioned. Co-chair Arnst suggested that Mr. Koegler present the information without a specific request for funds and then ask the representatives to go to their own boards and return to report what they are able to offer. Park Commission December 14, 1999 –Page 3 Co-chair Dallman recommended to just present a suggested amount and see what they come back with. One of the concepts to present is for the organization to offer to give up some field space if they are unable to make a financial offer. Mr. Koegler cautioned to tread carefully because that could sound like a threat rather than an offer. Hurm recommended that idea be saved until a second meeting to discuss in a negotiation phase. Hurm also asked how to handle any “laundry” that may surface. Koegler said that will take some thought. Hurm suggested putting an emphasis on looking to the future and starting with a clean slate. Co-chair Dallman said the Park Commission should present the numbers and show solidarity. Commissioner Puzak added that Mr. Koegler should not be expected to answer questions, but be there as a neutral facilitator. There was further discussion about fielding questions of “dirty laundry” and when to answer questions or pass them on to the Commissioners. Co-chair Arnst suggested that rules for the meeting be presented at the start in order to set perimeters. Park Planner Koegler recommended that the letters of invitation be sent from the Park Commission. Hurm asked about follow-up phone calls and suggested that an invitation from the Mayor may be more effective. Koegler agreed that the letter and follow-up phone call would be important. He suggested that a Chair of the Park Commission make the calls. Arnst agreed. It was decided to hold the joint meeting on Monday, January 31, 2000 from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.. The next regular meeting of the Park Commission will be on Tuesday, January th 11, 2000. Koegler is unable to attend the meeting on the 11, but will send thoughts for the Commission to consider for fine tuning. 8:12 p.m. — Mark Koegler left. Commissioner Mark Themig arrived. There was a two minute break. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (Revisited) A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of November 9, 1999 Arnst moved, Themig seconded to approve the Minutes as submitted. Motion passed 4/0. Park Commission December 14, 1999 –Page 4 5. CONCESSION STAND - MULTI PURPOSE BUILDING A. Review Design Plans for Kitchen Layout Engineer Larry Brown presented current plans for the multi-purpose building, noting that the most striking change is the addition of glass block. He explained the practical and esthetic reasons around the change as recommended by the architect. The interior of the building has also been reviewed for storage space, and the pavilion area as well, to make sure we’re getting the best use of our dollars. Of particular concern is the kitchen. If there are family reunions it seems best to use double doors for allowing light in and getting equipment in and out. The side doors will then be limited to singles. Brown also explained that with requirements regarding handicap access, they have tried to work around the location of the drinking fountain. A secured box in the pavilion area with water and electricity availability to the outside is also included in the plan. The idea of lighting the outside pavilion has not been discussed. Commissioner Themig questioned the placement of glass block above the windows (as shown in the north elevation), from a design standpoint. He noted that Ramsey County parks have had good luck with glass block in a similar building, however, in a newer building, where glass is placed at a lower level, there has been vandalism and broken glass. Co-chair Dallman said that the idea of glass block was to provide natural lighting in the bathroom areas. Maybe glass block is not needed in other areas, especially if the cost is higher. Brown explained that glass block in the main area was to provide lighting from the north side. Co-chair Arnst said the placement of glass block for the ends of the building looks fine, but suggested eliminating the block above doors and windows on the north and south elevations. Brown suggested perhaps lowering the glass block to be at the same height as the doors and windows. After a few other suggestions were made, it was agreed to defer the decision back to Brown and the architect. Brown asked for clarification that the Commissioners agree with the current design for glass block on the ends, and if they only want adjustments for the design on the sides of the building. Commissioner Puzak agreed, adding that the south elevation also fine, it’s just the north side that is questionable. Brown said he is not sure about the kitchen facilities, since it is depending upon the concessionaire who manages the facility. His opinion is to provide the basics, (shelf, counter, sink) because beyond that, whatever we provide probably won’t be right. Puzak said to make sure there is enough plumbing and power and drainage, adding that anything imbedded in walls and concrete should be well provided. Park Commission December 14, 1999 –Page 5 Arnst asked if there will be wiring to add outdoor lights for future skating. Brown said they will provide conduits to allow controls, but skating is another issue. Themig added a few comments from his previous experience with park shelters. He strongly recommended trench drains along an outside wall of each bathroom, rather than center floor drains because maintenance is much easier. Brown said his concern is overflow running across the floor area. Themig explained that the contractors can get a slope better with trench drains, plus it avoids flooding the whole room. Maintenance people love it and it doesn’t increase construction cost considerably. Themig’s other comment is that venting in bathrooms especially has been a problem in past designs. He suggested they install louver vents at the floor level and an exhaust fan to dry the floor. This method has been very helpful. Themig also offered to look into steel shutters for window exteriors, which has been a good anti-vandalism measure in parks. Arnst asked about the idea of including a fireplace. Brown said that we have attacked this project from bottom up and are trying to get down to within budget. A fireplace would add considerably to the cost. He then referred to the December 14, 1999 memorandum in which he outlined a tentative time schedule for design and bidding. According to the schedule, we would be hitting an ideal bidding window. Brown will bring an update back to the Park Commission for review and comment at a later time. B. Discuss Kitchen Layout Brown said that in regard to the kitchen layout, it has been his opinion to leave the area open. Beyond that, he is not sure what else needs to be determined at this time. Puzak raised the question of power for immediate, as well as future needs. He recommended a minimum of 200 AMP service. Brown explained that there is a transformer there now, but he is not sure what that’s capable of. This has to be reviewed along with the plan for a sanitary sewer line. Brown then stated that one of the things being considered is the plan for the sanitary sewer system. It was originally going to come off of Eureka Road and go to the picnic shelter around the parking lot. One of the things that has come up is the watermain for the Shorewood Ponds site. The Eureka Road neighborhood is not interested in seeing watermain go down their street. However one issue of the Fire Department is to ask the City to bring a watermain through Freeman Park. They could then utilize fire hydrants on Eureka Road with minimal tree loss. The reroute of electricity can be reviewed at that time. Co-chair Arnst asked about a past recommendation to link the [then future] Shorewood Ponds development to the LRT trail with a new walking trail. Brown said yes, that has been considered and it works well, in that builders are out there. However, it would go in after the fact. 6. REPORTS Park Commission December 14, 1999 –Page 6 A. Report on Right of Way Research for Smithtown West Brown reported that the City Attorney and assistant have researched and provided an Owners and Encumbrances Report on properties along Smithtown Road. They found that the City does not own right of way along Smithtown, other than where it has been platted. Since then, the City has met an elderly gentleman at the Minnesota Department of Transportation who knew some history. In searching archives, they have found a document showing that Smithtown is a Four Rod Statutory Roadway, (which would be a 66 foot right of way). It was apparently done in 1929. The attorney is checking whether that agrees with his data. Brown speculated that the attorney will likely say the research stands and the City will have to compensate people if we want to use the land. Arnst asked if this is true for a majority of the properties along Smithtown. Brown said yes, if you want to do improvements, with the exception of areas that have been platted. He estimated that 40% are dedicated rights of way, and those are intermittent. The cost would be substantial to obtain needed rights of way. This information will be put in map form to present to the City Council and the Park Commission. Puzak asked if this is true along both the west and east portions of Smithtown. Brown said it affects all of it. When asked if there would be issues with the west end, Brown said most certainly there would be. Arnst asked if MSA funds could be used for right of way acquisition, as that is the only way the City would be in a position to compensate for land purchase. Brown clarified that when talking about obtaining right of way, it would be to the outside of a trail from the edge of the pavement. There would be no need to compensate for already used area. Brown agreed that without using State Aid dollars on Smithtown, the possibility of a trail looks pretty bleak. Themig said the Commission should acknowledge there is demand for a trail, but until there is a major road improvement with MSA funding, it can’t be done. Brown said that is bookmarked for the year 2001. Puzak thanked Brown for an answer to a question that was asked a long time ago. This is one of the fundamental facts needed and the fact is we don’t have room to work with. Dallman asked if 2001 is when the Commission would start inquiring again. Brown said he foresees a year’s worth of right of way acquisition and another year for projects. Arnst asked if MSA is a given for Smithtown Road. Brown said no, but it is a politically charged issue. Curb and gutter is the primary concern. One compromise is to try to get the State to approve a full asphalt curb. It is not the most durable, but more palatable to residents who prefer the rural feel. Park Commission December 14, 1999 –Page 7 Themig asked when the interpretation will come back from the attorney. Brown said it would be around two weeks. He will have an update at the next meeting. Hurm left the meeting. (8:55 p.m.) Brown asked to report on an item which is not on the agenda. He handed out copies of the latest plans for the Vine Hill / Covington trail and said they are very close to the final design. Revisions per a recent Park Commission meeting have been incorporated into this plan. Brown presented a tentative schedule, adding that he is thinking of a public information meeting for the beginning of February. Arnst referred back to the Smithtown issue, saying that she recommends to present the new MSA information as soon as possible in order to avoid misinformation and exaggeration. Brown said the State is fortunately starting to bend a bit on MSA requirements for low speed rural sections. However, people may have to balance the need to use MSA funds if they want a trail. Dallman asked Brown about grants being applied toward the Freeman building. Brown said Administrator Hurm could probably answer that. Themig said there is an outdoor recreation grant program of $8 million which may apply. It is through the DNR and requires a letter of interest by the end of January. Brown will look into that and check with Hurm. Themig said the other grant is a local trail connections grant, but it sounds like that’s out for now. B. Review Vending Machines It was agreed that this does not look like a good option at this time. Co-chair Dallman suggested that they could perhaps look at the idea of pop machines for each of the two warming houses for the time being. C. Review Recycling Scenarios Tabled until January due to the absence of Commissioner Berndt. D. Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association - Consider Membership Commissioner Themig said that he is on the Board of Directors for the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association and explained the benefits of membership, which costs $220 per year. The Association keeps updates on grant program announcements and provides a membership directory, which is beneficial for the City to be a part of. Also they have become more of an advocate for parks and serve as an outside expert. Dallman asked if the City would be a member or the Park Commission would hold the membership. Themig said the City would be the member and all Park Commissioners Park Commission December 14, 1999 –Page 8 would receive the newsletters. Arnst agreed that the Commission should be networking more with the park community and said she liked the idea. Puzak moved that the City join the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association. Arnst seconded. Dallman asked if this would go to Council for approval. It was agreed that this would be brought to the Council in the next report from the Park Commission. (Puzak is the December liaison and Themig is the January liaison to the City Council.) Following discussion, the motion passed 4/0. E. Report on Park Foundation Meetings of November 11 and December 9 Dallman reported that the Foundation has reviewed possible brochures for distributing to prospective donators. They have worked out a plan and will have them printed. At the December meeting there was no quorum, however two financial advisers were there and showed how to approach prospective donators. Arnst recommended they shop around for printing costs at various printers. Dallman said that at the sports organizations have not attended the last two meetings. Arnst suggested that it would be good to come up with a schedule for the next 6 months as a way of giving direction. Themig asked if they anticipate the sports organizations will want to be involved. Dallman said that some sports representatives have continued to participate. F. Update on Skate Park Puzak reported that the committee has not had a meeting since his last report. They do have a second design on paper and have identified components that could be subtracted if the fund raising doesn’t reach $28,000. Their work is done until fundraising is more firm and will then fine tune the design to match funds. Arnst reported that Mayor Love has talked with the Rotary and they will contribute if he returns with a more detailed presentation, which he plans to do. Puzak added that they haven’t really heard any showstoppers yet. All potential donors appear willing to contribute. They have estimated approximately $10,000 will come from the public sector. Themig suggested they pursue a grant program for the skate park, too. Puzak said this is a great site and we can do a lot more. Themig added that he thinks this project has some merit for a grant, but they need to send an application request form. Arnst suggested a newsletter article to report on the progress with a skate park. Puzak said he would rather express the continuing need rather than progress, but it is always a good idea to communicate. Dallman strongly suggested a letter go to the Tonka Men’s Club. Park Commission December 14, 1999 –Page 9 G. Review of Potential DNR Grants Themig said the only question at this point is if we want to look at a different trail segment, since the Smithtown idea is on hold. Puzak recommended waiting for the official legal opinion on rights of way. 7.SMITHTOWN WEST-DEVELOP TIME LINES FOR GRANT APPLICATIONS, ETC. This item has been covered and is on hold until the final report form Engineer Brown. 8.SCHEDULE DATE AND NOTIFICATION PROCESS FOR WINTER TRAIL WALK The Commission had intended to walk the plowed LRT trail, however, due to lack of snow, this item was tabled until the January meeting. 9. OLD BUSINESS Commissioner Dallman asked if the easement request has been sent to the Planning Commission for the ball field at Freeman Park. Brown will check and report at the January 11 Park Commission meeting. 10. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. 11. ADJOURNMENT Arnst moved, Puzak seconded to adjourn the meeting. Motion passed 4/0. The meeting adjourned at 9:34 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Connie Bastyr Recording Secretary