Loading...
111400 PK MIN CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD PARK COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2000 7:30 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Arnst called the meeting to order at 7:37 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Arnst, Commissioners Bix, Themig, Young, Dallman and Puzak; City Engineer Brown; Council Liaison Zerby. Excused Absent: Commissioner Berndt B. Review Agenda Dallman moved, Themig seconded, to approve the Agenda as submitted. Motion passed 6/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of October 10, 2000 (Att.-#2A Draft Summary) Puzak moved, Bix seconded, approving the Minutes of October 10, 2000, as presented. Motion passed 6/0 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR South Tonka Little League representative’s Gordy Lindstrom and Brian Tischy addressed the Commission regarding Park improvements. They approached the Commission asking for consideration at the December meeting of several issues related to the third phase of Little League’s park improvement plan. With phases one and two complete, which include the addition of dugouts on fields #1 and #2, resodding, and the building up of professional type pitching mounds, they are requesting four items of the City. The first request Little League has for Freeman Park is for the City to install underground irrigation on fields #1 and #2; second, they would like to have water available at the concession stands to hook up hoses etc.; next, they would like to see the City provide restroom facilities at concessions; and finally, they are looking for approval and electricity for scoreboards on these fields. Discussion ensued, with Chair Arnst asking for clarification over who is to fund these items. Tischy indicated they expected the City to pay for the irrigation system and concession restrooms, however, they were trying to raise funds for the scoreboards. Zerby inquired as to how Freeman Park compares to the other facilities they play at in other cities. Tischy replied that Freeman is by far the best facility they play at, as it exists, and is used most often. Zerby asked if there were any other facilities nearby that could be held up as an example of this phase three-type development. Tischy identified the Optimist Park Fields in Glen Lake off Excelsior Boulevard. Zerby inquired also if Tischy was aware of how that park was funded. Tischy believed the Optimist Club and City of Minnetonka paid for the improvements, PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2000 Page 2 of 6 whereas, in the case of Freeman Park, Men’s Club and private donation has paid for the improvements for baseball. Chair Arnst asked Engineer Brown to estimate where the City’s budget was over the next five years, as it would relate to funding such an effort. Brown estimated that irrigating fields could roughly run $20,000 per field, plus, the added expense of installing water into concessions where there currently are no floor drains to meet plumbing codes could have an expensive impact as well. Brown reiterated that the Park Fund budget is currently stretched to its limit, with many improvement commitments already being executed via Eddy Station, the Skate Park, etc. The City, in cooperation with other agencies, is actually taking on fundraising ventures to help stabilize that fund at this point. The capital improvements funding schedule over the next five years indicates they are stretched thin. With this in mind, Arnst asked Little League when they had hoped to have their phase three complete. Tischy indicated spring of 2001. Bix pointed out that it took approximately seven years to install bathrooms at the other end of Eddy Station. To which Brown added, Eddy Station had been slated in capital improvements for seven years before finally moving forward. Arnst asked the Commission if they felt this request should be considered further at the December meeting. Puzak felt uncomfortable saying they could proceed with anything other than assessing the needs and building a long-range plan. The budget, as they all know, is spent. Tischy added that they are aware of, and sympathetic to, the funding problems, but wanted to get their request officially on the boards. He requested that, if there was some possibility of creative financing, they are considered. In the past, they have gotten much of their funding from other sources and businesses for improvements to the park and might be able to add to the improvement effort here. Puzak agreed it was beneficial to have record of their phase three process documented. Even though the dollars don’t exist now, the Commission could still support their efforts. Zerby reiterated that the Park and City have already committed to and have many other priorities. He maintained that if Freeman is already deemed a “premier” field in the little league realm, what might the importance be of deviating funds from one source to another at this time to meet their spring deadline. He believed the request a bit out of balance. Tischy agreed, that although Freeman is one of the best fields around, he wanted to clarify that the money came from little league resources - resources that they’ve tapped into to get it to that level. Tischy added that they would like the City’s cooperation along this vein to continue to make improvements. Council member Lizée, as an observer this evening, found it difficult to justify the expenditure. She supported Zerby’s comments that, with Eddy Station not far away and the commitment there, it does not balance to deviate from their priorities at this time. Arnst assured Little League that their requests will be on record, and if they would like to submit past, present, and/or future long-range plans, they may do so at any time. 4. REPORTS A. Report on City Council Meeting of October 23, and November 13, 2000 - (Council member) Chair Arnst reported that during the Council Meeting of October 23rd they discussed the Golf Tournament idea as a possible fundraising tool. Council also requested a work session be scheduled with the Park Commission later this month to discuss three specific items. First, the role Parks will play in the Gideon PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2000 Page 3 of 6 Glen project; second, further brainstorming on fundraising efforts; and finally, the possibility of tunneling the LRT under Highway 19. The date being considered for the work session is November 28, 2000. Zerby reported that during the meeting of November 13, Council approved expenditure of funds for the Warming House Shelter at Cathcart Park. There was also discussion over the Skate Park resurfacing expenditure. Council approved expenditure not to exceed $6,000, which is a small portion of what it will take to finance the resurfacing project. Unfortunately, it is unlikely the resurfacing will be complete this season. Commissioner Young asked if Mn/DOT would be contributing to the cost. Brown added that the contractor is responsible for all damage incurred on the surface and will be splitting the cost of the overlay with the City. At that time the City will also add a bituminous curb. Zerby reported that the purchase agreement for Gideon Glen has been signed. BReport on Land Conservation Environment Committee Activities - (Park . Commissioner Berndt) They did not meet last month and therefore have no report. LCEC will meet November 15, 2000. CReport on Park Foundation Meeting of October 18, 2000 - (Park Commissioner . Dallman) Dallman reported that they were able to meet and discussed fundraising. The rotary has used a Golf Tournament as a fundraiser and did so at the club for a fee. Although time consuming and labor intensive, they raised money sponsoring holes and from the silent auction. They also discussed the possibility of Sports Organizations doing tournaments and fundraisers with a portion of the funds going to the Foundation. The question remains whether Sports Organizations would be willing to share the funds they raise from such a labor-intensive project. Finally, they discussed approaching prominent figures in the community to attend or aid in the Golf Tournament fundraiser. Dallman mentioned they would be meeting November 15, 2000, to further discuss these ideas. 5. DISCUSS WITH MINNETONKA COMMUNITY EDUCATION SERVICES (MCES) REGARDING FIELD ASSIGNMENTS-DEB MALMSTEN A. Explanation by MCES of Process for Assigning Shorewood Fields to Sports Organizations Deb Malmsten, of MCES, addressed the Commission with a brief description of the field assigning process. According to Malmsten, in the past, they have brought Sports Organizations and representatives from each City together to discuss how many members, how many fields each organization needs, and how best to distribute these fields. Last year, they did not hold this meeting and simply assigned field use based on the 1999 distribution. She indicated this did not work, thus, this year they will revert to the meeting process. In January, they will ask representatives from each City and one from each Sports Organization to meet. This will be especially important this year due to the field renovation going on at MME and potentially at the high school, which could impact all field assignments. There has not been much variation in the past few years. However, since organizations keep growing and field space remains stagnant, there is a need for greater awareness and communication of use. Often, organizations give back space or time they don’t need in an effort to share it with others who do. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2000 Page 4 of 6 B. Questions From Park Commission Themig asked if there was any written policy dictating how fields get scheduled or allocated to different groups. Malmsten replied that organizations have simply worked it out between them. As needs have shifted and organizations have grown the groups have been very good about voluntarily giving up fields not in use. There is no written policy. There is a kind of unwritten known fact or history that you don’t schedule a certain group, say East Tonka little league at Freeman when it is South Tonka little league who has done all the work to the fields. Themig inquired over the hours of use. Malmsten said they are in use 5 P.M. to dark and if a field is not in use and another organization requests it, she will often call the scheduled organization before allowing others the opportunity to use it. Bix wondered if there were any numbers they’ve collected over the years that identify merging trends, for instance, what organizations are growing or shrinking. Malmsten did not have access to that sort of data, but noted that soccer is continually growing with approximately 1500 kids participating. Zerby brought up Badger field. Malmsten indicated that, while there was no formal delineation, Badger was strictly a football field due to the money they’ve invested in it. Brown shared a little history, whereas, the field was damaged from soccer use prior to football season once, thus, causing hard feelings. Zerby noted, therefore the field sits empty April-August. Puzak asked whether Malmsten gets exact registration numbers from the Sports Organizations when they file their insurance certificates. She said they do not. Malmsten indicated that typically those numbers are not known at the time of registration. Puzak shared with Malmsten the Commission’s new sports user fee program, which requires registrants to pay a $5.00 per person user fee enabling the Commission to track use. Although Puzak had hoped Community Ed already possessed these numbers, he asked Malmsten if they could reserve scheduling the fields until the user fees were received. Chair Arnst reiterated the City’s desire to be a part of the January meeting to discuss everyone's needs and distribution based on exact numbers. Malmsten could not give the January date at this time, but needs to discuss with MME the changes to their fields and the impact that will have. She also noted they would be willing to work out a way to obtain more detail. Puzak inquired if the software they have can provide information like “user hours per field” and the number of athletes. Malmsten said that although it does not, they might be able to purchase a supplemental program for about $300. that is specifically geared for sports scheduling. CDiscussion by Park Commission for Any Further Action . After thanking Malmsten for her time, the Commission discussed what further action needed to be taken. Puzak said that although they did not get the total registration and athlete counts they were looking for, the Commission would be able to work with Malmsten and the Community Ed department to develop it. Chair Arnst brought up Nielsen’s suggestion that the sports organization roster counts be a requirement included on registration forms and turned in with insurance statements. Themig added that it might be beneficial to put together a standard policy that says what is required of organizations to be affiliated with the city and have use of its park system. The City and organizations would enter into an agreement. Sports Organizations would be required to share proof of insurance, registrations numbers, etc. and in return the City would grants use of its facilities. Jeff Bailey, Minnetonka Girls Softball Association, appreciated the City’s instigation of the “Sock” user fee; however, inquired over the way fields would be allocated. He questioned the large disparities between the different sports organizations. Themig felt the new software would be beneficial because Community Education could account for per hour per day efficient use of the fields, and when space was available they PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2000 Page 5 of 6 could distribute it to those in need. Bailey explained that it may be difficult for a small organization to justify the $5 expenditure to use these fields one night a week or seldom, when there are other cities who do not charge for their use. It is easier for the large organizations, like little league, which use the fields every night to justify the fee. Brown explained that the sock user fee was established to try to apply a fee uniformly, even though we knew there might be some disparity between certain organization numbers and usage. He continued that if the City can encourage MCES to purchase the sports scheduling software, they may be able to attain the additional information they need and field allocation may change. Puzak added that managing the Park system, a $5 to $10 million asset, given all the parks, is probably worth the $300 software it would take to properly do so. Chair Arnst voiced her concern about sports organizations altering a field without first the City assessing the demand. As in the instance of South Tonka Little League developing mounds on field #5. Along with Community Ed, the Park Commission should take part in determining the allocation schedule, as well as, assessing the highest and best use of the fields. Themig reiterated that the schedule, once formalized, should come back to the Commission to take a look at to ensure that there is some level of equality between the different associations. Once they’ve moved to scheduling per day per hour, identifying available space should be more easily attained. Arnst again voiced her concern that the stewardship of the parks belongs to the City of Shorewood, and in the past, the City has been out of the loop. She added that some of the Sports Organizations feel they own the parks more than others do. Puzak pointed out that, although the Sports Organizations may have invested in the capital and have equity in the capital improvements they have created, the City is responsible for the Parks themselves. The user fee was brought about for the care and maintenance - i.e. feeding of the grass, the mowing and trimming. These are separate issues. 6. SKATE PARK A. Update on Fundraising Chair Arnst shared new funding committed to the project. After the City of Deephaven dedicated $2,500 to the Skate Park in September, their Park Commission has now committed another $5,600 from their own budget. Which puts the total City donations at $21,000, for a grand total of approximately $25,000. B. Update from Design Committee Puzak reported that the Design Committee met November 13, 2000, finalizing a layout for the Skate Park. Engineer Brown shared his minutes from the previous nights meeting. With Tim Hughes help, they designed the park based on three criteria: 1) Is the equipment consistent with the original Skate Park Concept plan in general? 2) Does the equipment compliment other skate parks and not just duplicate them? 3) Does the equipment provide opportunities for a range of skating abilities and ages? As Tim Hughes indicated, the park needs “to flow”. With his expertise, the seven pieces chosen for the park fulfill these criteria. Brown shared the diagram of the Skate Park plan and its equipment attached to his memo. The cost estimate is roughly $16,000 - $18,000 for equipment, with additional expenditures that might include the curb etc. Brown indicated that if the Commission was comfortable with the layout, he could direct staff to pin down quotes. Puzak suggested they send copies of Brown’s memo to the donor cities and keep them abreast of the City’s progress. Puzak also complimented Engineer Brown’s efforts outlining, PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2000 Page 6 of 6 designing the flow, chalking out the plan and reserving the soil needed to make the project a go when ready. Puzak Moved to recommend Council approves the purchase of the Ramps and Rails shown in the final design (Att. #1, Engineer Brown’s memorandum of November 14, 2000), empowering staff to make the purchase of equipment, at, or not to exceed $18,500. Themig seconded. Motion passed 6/0. After a brief discussion over the viability of a small burm, fence/guard rails, or ballards along the highway side, Bix shared some photos she’d taken of another park. While in California, Bix visited a Skate park and took pictures of their regulations, park signage, and donor plaques to use as examples for Shorewood. She pointed out that although Santa Barbara had a paid attendant on duty, she believed the Shorewood Park could self regulate itself to an extent. 7. SET WORK SESSION DATE WITH CITY COUNCIL Chair Arnst reported the work session date would be scheduled for November 28, 2000, at 7:15 P.M. 8. NEW BUSINESS Arnst shared with the Commission a complaint received from the Southshore Senior Center regarding parking conflicts during football. During senior center activities scheduled one evening their parking attendant was threatened by football patrons looking for parking. Due to these problems, the senior center is considering not scheduling events at the center on football nights, which is a hardship for them because this is how the center raises money for itself. They have also found people in the kitchen rummaging for food for their teams and using the private restrooms. Arnst passed these complaints along to the Mayor and staff for consideration. 9. ADJOURNMENT Young moved, Biz seconded to adjourn. Motion passed 6/0. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Kristi B. Anderson RECORDING SECRETARY