Loading...
070808 PK MIN ND CITY OF SHOREWOOD 26655 WEST 62 STREET PARK COMMISSION MEETING CATHCART PARK TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2008 7:00 P.M. MINUTES MEET WITH CHANHASSEN PARK COMMISSION TO REVIEW CATHCART PARK 1.CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Davis convened the Park Commission Meeting at 7:00 p.m. noting that the Chanhassen Park Commission members would be arriving shortly for a brief meeting. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Davis, Commissioners Young, Hensley, Norman, Trent, Quinlan, and DeMers; City Engineer Landini; late arrival Council member Bailey B. Review Agenda Item 7.1.A, review layout plans for Cathcart and Badger Parks, were added to the agenda. Young moved, Chair Davis seconded, approving the Agenda as amended. Motion passed 7/0. THE CHANHASSEN PARK COMMISSION ARRIVED WITH DIRECTOR TODD HOFFMAN AT 7:10PM FOR A BRIEF MEETING Landini stated that the 1993 Agreement between the Cities of Shorewood and Chanhassen showed that while the park is located within Chanhassen city limits and exists on their park maps, it is owned by the City of Shorewood. The agreement states that Chanhassen pays for all green maintenance and trees, while Shorewood pays for the infrastructure and capital improvements. Hoffman added that the church across the street deeded the park to the City of Shorewood. Chair Davis welcomed the Commission and asked for their thoughts on Cathcart Park, its condition, and amenities. She noted that the tennis courts were in horrendous condition and that a recent write in campaign to save the courts by neighbors have the Commission considering what to do with them. Hoffman stated that, in his opinion, the courts did not look too bad. He pointed out that Cathcart, similar to many of Chanhassen’s community parks, has much to offer even though tennis courts require significant capital investments. Those high costs are why Chanhassen has chosen to only install courts in its largest parks, rather than its neighborhood parks. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 2 OF 8 Norman asked Chanhassen members what amenities they are updating in their parks. One commissioner stated that adding a shelter and pad have been a high priority, while many others offer half court basketball. He encouraged Shorewood to consider a shelter with bathroom facilities. Council member Bailey arrived at 7:15pm Hoffman stated that trails both internal, within the parks themselves, and external, connecting the parks to the rest of the community, have been a number one priority. He noted that it has been their policy to give every resident half mile access to a park and that each park offer a little different flavor. He acknowledged that Cathcart is a good size neighborhood park with much to offer. Another Chanhassen commissioner complimented Cathcart for its variety of amenities noting that it is more similar to a community park than a neighborhood park. He suggested Shorewood not only consider the shelter they’d referenced but a shelter/warming house combo. Hoffman suggested Shorewood contact Dermco for its tennis court resurfacing project. He stated that the court seemed to be in good condition for a small public court and that he would not consider removing the court now. Hensley asked what the highest use park amenity in Chanhassen was. Hoffman stated it would be the trails and skate park. He acknowledged that the true purpose of a neighborhood park is to build community. One Chanhassen commissioner asked if the City of Shorewood had any plans to add trail to connect Powers Boulevard thru Shorewood to Excelsior. He urged the Commission to add trails using state and county right of ways or whenever a road is redone. He stated that there is no choice and that trails must be a priority and added whenever possible since they are the number one use. Chair Davis thanked the Chanhassen Park Commission for their input and returned to the regular meeting at their departure. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of June 10, 2008 Hensley moved, Young seconded, approving the Park Commission Meeting minutes of June 10, 2008, as submitted. Motion passed 7/0. 3. REPORTS A. Report on City Council Meeting of June 9 and 23, 2008 PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 3 OF 8 th The June 9 meeting had been discussed at a previous Commission meeting. At the June rd 23 meeting, a new City Administrator had been hired and the Council approved well capping for the Sate Park with funding coming from the Water Fund. Norman asked what the future of the property was behind City Hall. He also asked about the Woodhaven property across town, as there are no real parks on that side of Shorewood. Bailey stated that he would prefer the property behind city Hall be sold, personally, but that this question had yet to be raised. Young stated that he would like to table starting the construction of a new park from scratch on the Woodhaven property or anywhere else when we have so many existing parks with so many needs that adding something else to the plate would be too much. Chair Davis stated that she could see starting the discussion about trails up again, painful as it was, but more and more people are demanding them and might be open to the discussion. Hensley concurred, stating that, at minimum, a priority should be to plan for trails so that we can connect the dots within Shorewood via trails. He believed that a master plan should exist which states we’d like to have parks within half a mile of all residents or at least keep the land near City Hall for potential add-on park use. Chair Davis asked staff to supply Commissioners with master plans so that they can review them for discussion. Young commented that, while he liked the idea of trails, and a trail along Smithtown Road made sense at the time, the Commission was burned badly the last time around. B. Community Rec Resources Update on Field Monitoring and Observations Kristi Anderson, of Community Rec Resources (CRR), was in attendance to share observations with regard to field use at Freeman Park this spring/summer. Acknowledging the attendance of Council member Bailey, an active past board member for girls’ softball, she encouraged him to shed light on these observations with regard to field use as well. Anderson pointed out that, based on ongoing park monitoring and discussions with the concessionaire, overall usage at Freeman was down somewhat significantly this spring/summer, as well as time reserved at Manor Park. As part of the Park Coordinator services it is CRR’s duty to ensure via the park priority policy that fair and equitable use of the parks is being observed, in addition the policy was created to ensure that scheduled use was being made of the facilities, otherwise this time should be relinquished and made available to other users. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 4 OF 8 Anderson pointed out that since the construction of the new girls’ softball facility this past year many of the younger players, whose families frequented the concessions at Eddy Station and used the fields, have been absent. This lighter use of Freeman facilities begs the question of CRR and the Park Commission whether the field space should be made available and opened up to new users next year. Even though the field space was reserved via user fees by girls softball, CRR pointed out that the fee alone was not the desired result, it is CRR’s duty to monitor and ensure that there is active field use of the facilities as part of the priority policy so that desirable fields are not sitting empty. Anderson was unsure whether this would be an ongoing issue next year but wished to make the Commission aware of the situation so that fields in the 2009 season would be assigned to those who commit to use. She acknowledged that there is a huge history which accompanies the creation of the priority policy and the City’s desire to provide fair and equitable use of its facilities. She cautioned reserving space, which will go unused even if it is paid for, when others would be happy to pick up the unused time for their organization. Bailey explained that there was a leadership change for MGSA girls’ softball this year, as well as a shift of some of the players to the new facility which impacted the number of teams and players using the fields in Shorewood. In addition, he stated that the early season scheduling meeting did not occur which left much space unused. He stated that mid season he caught the mistake of unused time and spoke with the leadership at which time they tried to utilize some of the space reserved at Freeman more effectively. He indicated that there was a mistake made this year and that he does not anticipate this problem next year as many new board members get up to speed. Chair Davis thanked Anderson for keeping the Commission posted. Hensley stated that he believed the problem would work itself out given another year especially since the time is paid for, MGSA acknowledges that they do not want to waste it either. C. Update on Skate Park Well Being Capped As reported earlier the well would be capped using monies from the Water Fund. D. Update on Summer Children’s Programs Chair Davis stated that it appears the children’s programs had gone well so far. She rd questioned why so few kids signed up to participate in the 3 Lair event and whether the City would be losing a deposit for both weeks. With Big Walter scheduled to perform at Freeman on Friday, she urged staff to check to confirm and make sure Famous Dave’s is prepared to have enough food for the show, especially with Secretary Grout out this week to do it herself. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 5 OF 8 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were none. 5. TENNIS COURT PRESENTATION – DERMCO – follows item #6. 6. AUTHORIZE FUNDS FOR SOIL BORINGS AT CATHCART PARK AND MANOR PARK Landini explained that soil borings were recommended for Cathcart and Manor Parks for the rink lights and further construction projects. Norman asked whether the lights at Manor were adequate as long as the one leaning light pole was straightened. Landini stated that by doing the soil borings at the same time there is a cost savings, as opposed to doing one now and the other at a later date. He pointed out that to drop the borings at either park would not be much cost savings because you would need a boring to construct a warming house shelter at Cathcart or to add-on to the Manor shelter in any event even if the Commission felt borings for the lights were not necessary. DeMers stated that he thought Director Brown had indicated that the Public Works staff would be able to straighten the pole without replacing all the lights at Manor. Landini suggested the Commission only focus on replacing the lights at Badger this year anyway, due to budgets, as opposed to replacing the lights at all three parks which would eat up much of the budget. Norman agreed the borings might supply the City with good information in case we want to build shelters and/or warming houses at these parks. Young moved, Norman seconded, to approve the authorization of expenditure of funds from the Park Capital Improvement Funds for soil borings at Manor Park and Cathcart Park not to exceed $4,400. Hensley stated that if this were his own property he would not have soil borings done until he had a plan in place of exactly where pads and poles would need to go. Landini stated that it is likely they will need a spread footing at Badger, similar to the football lighting, but he was not sure if Cathcart would require the same. Hensley stated that the free skate area at Cathcart was poor last year and that a new layout is necessary, but without a plan, Hensley stated that he would vote no to go ahead with borings until he sees a plan and layout for the park. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 6 OF 8 Trent stated that he felt borings could help them in their planning process for the park layout. Quinlan stated that the rink itself is not going anywhere else and borings will be helpful. Landini stated that the free skate park lights would be moveable, provided enough wire is allowed. Motion passed 6/1, Hensley dissenting. 5.con’t TENNIS COURT PRESENTATION – DERMCO Dwight Charles of Dermco, explained how a tennis court works and is laid out. A court is typically 60X120 (running North and South) built on 6” of class 5 and 3” of asphalt, which is then color coated. He pointed out that tennis courts are not maintenance free items and should be redone every 3-5 years. With regard to repairs, Charles stated that this court is not in that bad of shape comparatively to many others he sees. 1. The simplest or cheapest repair is to clean it and patch it. Cracks are another matter, due to movement, even the repaired cracks will reappear as hairline st cracks the 1 year, then wide in consecutive years. ‘Birdbaths’, or low spots, must be patched to keep them to a minimum. Areas around posts can be feathered out or the concrete can be removed, the posts lowered, and replaced for an additional fee. To resurface: $5600-5700. To reclaim posts and concrete an additional: $1600-1700 2.While repairing offers varying degrees of success, removing the entire court and rebuilding it costs approximately $30,000 3.Sand filled turf is another option, though it is a bit slower surface, it runs about $30,000, 4.Plastic tile surface, as done in Eden Prairie and Apple Valley, will run in the $30,000 range 5.A brand new court will cost roughly $45,000 6.To demolish and get rid of the existing court will run about $15,000 Trent asked when the best time to resurface a court is. Charles stated that obviously the best time to resurface is in the early spring in order to get a full season use out of the surface before winter weather impacts the new surface again. Typically in early May, the repair process only takes 3-4 days, beyond these repairs there PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 7 OF 8 are other spendy options including laying fabric over the entire current surface and laying new asphalt for around $24,000. Chair Davis asked what success they’ve seen with these options. Charles stated that there are once again varying degrees of success, and in fact a snow covered court with constant cold temperatures over the winter are best for a court as opposed to the drastic temperature changes we saw this previous year. He noted that the Cathcart court had obviously not been redone for a very long time, based on its condition and overlay, possibly 12 years plus. Hensley asked when Dermco could get to this court. Charles stated that they probably could not repair this court until late July using a three coat system, patching, then adding a final layer of black and sand to hide every flaw, followed by 2 coats of color on top and the court lines. He indicated that there is a repair kit of sorts if public works wanted to touch up the court themselves after 1-2 years in between the regular repair cycle, but the patches would show and the color would not match the faded surface. He reiterated the importance of putting courts into a regular repair cycle, as they are not maintenance free, rotating between parks is critical. Charles stated that he cycles through the numerous tennis courts for both Chanhassen and Maple Grove. Chair Davis asked Charles to put together a bid for Cathcart, and Manor as well if it would be close, for resurfacing early next spring, as well as, getting the other courts at Badger on a cycle. Charles stated that rather than drive all over looking at similar courts within cities, he already had looked at Manor Court, and based on its size and layout, he could estimate it to be the same price as Cathcart. He pointed out that, in looking at the condition of Cathcart, if the cracks have been there as long as 10 years, the surface may be done shifting by now and patching may be all it needs. Charles suggested a 6 year cycle as adequate, and using a one color system, as this is more affordable and saves approximately $250 more than installing the previous two color system. Chair Davis thanked Charles for taking the time to come out and stated they looked forward to a 2009 installation once the bids were received. Hensley stated that a mere $5600-6000 per court resurface estimate was a no brainer to move forward with in his opinion. 7. AUTHORIZE FUNDS FOR RINK LIGHTS AT THE FOLLOWING PARKS A. Badger Park PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 8 OF 8 Landini stated that he would highly recommend the rink lights at Badger be replaced since one of them actually fell down. Young moved, Norman seconded, recommending approval of the installation of rink lighting at Badger Park not to exceed $49,999. Motion passed 7/0. Landini stated that staff would return with final cost numbers at the next meeting and will take the recommendation to the July 14 City Council meeting for their approval. B. Cathcart Park Norman stated that he would like to see a complete estimate for all wiring and lighting at Cathcart before going forward, especially if the Commission thinks it might like to create a new layout for the park. He felt he would prefer to see the boring results before proceeding with a recommendation. The Commission concurred. Chair Davis suggested the Commission hold a work session to look at the master plans of these parks and look at realistic figures and estimates for the repairs and proposed expansions. Charles, of Dermco, still present, interjected that he would like to see a warming house and shelter combo similar to Manor Park for Cathcart as well. Chair Davis suggested the discussion for Cathcart and Manor Park rink lighting and layout be tabled for the work session. In the meantime, she once again asked staff to supply the Commissioners with master plans for these parks to start reviewing and making suggestions for discussion. NEW BUSINESS Chair Davis wished to acknowledge a series entitled State of the Parks 2008, a collection series she had been putting together with Norman’s assistance, documenting the condition of all parks, their improvements and needs. She noted that she was in the process of putting the series into a powerpoint presentation. As funding will be a problem going forward, she pointed to the need to start a dialogue with the Council regarding funding going forward. In addition, she felt a dialogue must begin to discuss the future of trails and how these will be funded. She urged the Commissioners to add their thought and ideas, especially once they view the powerpint. As the budget process has begun, Bailey encouraged Davis to look at presenting her powerpoint via a work session to the Council sometime in August. He noted that levy limits have been imposed for the next three years, which limits increases to 3.9% therefore funding will be a difficult piece for many in the coming years. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 9 OF 8 8. DETERMINE LIAISON FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON JULY 14 Chair Davis volunteered to be liaison and would propose an August work session to the City Council. 9. ADJOURN Hensley moved, Young seconded, adjourning the Park Commission Meeting of July 8, 2008, at 9:25p.m. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Kristi B. Anderson Recorder