022701 PK WS MIN
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2001 6:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE WORK SESSION
Chair Arnst called the work session to order at 6:02 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present: Chair Arnst, Commissioners Dallman, Young and Meyer; City Engineer Brown;
Council Liaison Liz é e
Late Arrivals: Commissioners Puzak and Bix
Absent: Commissioner Berndt
B. Review Agenda
While no action was taken, everyone approved the agenda as presented.
2. REVIEW MASTER PLAN
Chair Arnst presented the Master Plan for review as the first matter of business. Engineer Brown handed
out the latest edition of the 1996 Goal Statement which identified five classifications of Parks as follows:
Neighborhood Parks - like Badger and Silverwood among others
?
Community Playfields - like those belonging to the school districts
?
Community Parks - such as Freeman
?
Conservancy Lands - wetlands system
?
Special Use areas like Crescent Beach and Christmas Lake Access
?
Brown pointed out that, until recently, the emphasis of the Park Commission has been to move from one
CIP (Capital Improvement Project) to another and he urged the Commission to refocus and reevaluate the
park process as a whole.
Commissioner Puzak arrived at 6:23 P.M.
With this in mind, Chair Arnst and the Commission developed an outline to follow as they move forward
updating the Master Plan for 2001. The outline presented was as follows:
I. Review Master Plan
1. Review Each Park/Trail System
PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2001
Page 2 of 3
A) Visit the Parks each spring inviting neighbors and Council to join in
B) Indicate Changes and Update Maps
C) Verify the Classification
D) Evaluate what else is needed
2. Public Input Phase - gather info.
A) Define the Target Audience
3. Establish the Priority List
4. Implementation and Budgeting
TIMELINE: based on the Comprehensive Plan, the Master Plan would be updated every 5 years and
glanced at annually.
Discussion ensued regarding the timeline of the Master Plan. Puzak maintained that the typical length of
time to amend a park is approximately three years, which includes the process of evaluation, budgeting
and implementing. Brown reiterated that the Master Plan, be devoid of cost constraints, and act as the
Comprehensive Plan for the Parks. He continued that once the intended use of a park is established and
organizations approach the Commission with ideas these can be weighed against the goals for that park.
I.E. - with long term Comprehensive plans in place, it will be easier to see if a request fits the plan.
Commissioner Bix arrived at 6:50 P.M.
Young inquired if the Master Plan is cast in stone. Brown pointed out that it is a living document, able to
be revised at any time. Brown mentioned that, in the past, most of the characteristics of the parks, or what
they evolved into, were determined by the size of the park itself. Young asked if there was a clear view
of who is using the various parks and whether they are meeting the intended users needs. Brown was
hopeful that the current updating process would determine if the original designs still meet the needs of
the target audience or not.
Chair Arnst asked the Commission if they were comfortable with this as a starting point. Everyone agreed
3DISCUSSION REGARDING CRITERIA FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
.
Chair Arnst relayed the Councils concern and the need for the Commission to determine whether a
standard set of questions be designed to analyze Capital Improvement Projects. Brown stated that with an
updated Master Plan, when the Commission evaluates an organizations CIP request, they merely will
need to ask themselves the question, does it fit or is it consistent with the Master Plan and then go on
from there. In the future, the Commission agreed to consider its CIP requests based upon that question.
4. DISCUSSION REGARDING ORIENTATION OF NEW COMMISSIONERS AND THE
ROLE OF THE COMMISSIONS AND COUNCIL AS THEY WORK TOGETHER
As he laid out in the Park Commission meeting of February 13, 2001, Puzak presented a three-step
process of orientation for incoming Commissioners.
1) Introduce new Commissioners in May during the park tours
2) Have incoming Commissioners attend a meeting first as a visitor
3) Give them an opportunity to review the Master Plan after the Park Tour
PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2001
Page 3 of 3
Chair Arnst added the need to define terms like Council Liaison and CIP to incoming Commissioners and
supply them with past minutes pertaining to issues on the table. Puzak suggested that the facilitator of
that training be a neutral party. He felt that, ideally, the City Administrator or staff could best and most
consistently execute this training without clouded judgment.
5. GRAND OPENINGS FOR 2001
A) Skate Park - June
Chair Arnst asked that the Skate Park Grand Opening occur as soon as the installation of equipment was
complete. Brown felt this could happen in late May or June. He added that Tim Hughes, one of the
original Skate Park supporters, asked to give an exhibition at the grand opening. The Commission agreed
that youth involvement and a demo of this type would be advantageous. Liz é e suggested a creative name
gathering for the park be advertised in the newsletter. Bix offered the idea of selling sponsorship of the
name. This would be determined at a later date.
B) Eddy Station
Brown indicated that the temperature would be the determining factor of when to host a Grand Opening
celebration of Eddy Station. Chair Arnst suggested holding it during a peak time in spring when many
users would be at the park already.
C) Others?
Chair Arnst asked for additional events for 2001. It was decided that Council would be asked the status
of Gideon Glen.
6. ADJOURNMENT
The work session ended at 7:30 P.M.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Kristi B. Anderson
RECORDING SECRETARY