Loading...
071409 PK MIN CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD PARK COMMISSION MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2009 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING A. Roll Call Present: Chair Norman; Commissioners Davis, DeMers, Quinlan, Robb, and Edmondson Late arrival City Council member Bailey; and Park Coordinator Anderson Absent: Commissioner Trent B. Review Agenda Davis moved, Quinlan seconded, approving the Agenda as submitted. Motion passed 6/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Park Tour Minutes of June 9, 2009 Quinlan moved, Robb seconded, approving the Park Tour Minutes of June 9, 2009, as presented. Motion passed 6/0. B. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of June 9, 2009 Edmondson moved, Davis seconded, approving the Regular Minutes of June 9, 2009, as submitted. Motion passed 6/0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were none. 4. REVIEW AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LITTLE LEAGUE SIGNAGE AT BALL FIELDS - (Planning Director, Brad Nielsen) Planning Director Nielsen explained that the Council directed staff to draft a tightly written amendment to the Code that would include a license agreement setting forth the conditions of approval. Staff suggested a conditional use process be established listing the circumstances under which signs would be allowed in the parks. One of the conditions requires the applicant to enter into an annual license agreement with the City. This gives the City greater control than just the CUP. In addition, Nielsen stated that there is no vested right in the license from year to year, and if the City decided not to allow signs in the parks in the future, it would simply not issue a license. Nielsen indicated that the placement of signs would be limited to Freeman Park, the one and only community park, that the backs of the signs must be colored dark green, the license must be applied for annually, and that the license must pay permit fees for each individual sign. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2009 PAGE 2 OF 6 Nielsen summarized the temporary sign ordinance changes, noting that each individual sign would require a $20 permit fee and an annual license fee of somewhere around $150 would be required to apply for the permits. He asked the Commissioner for their input. Edmondson reiterated that signs be allowed only in Freeman Park, the City’s only Community Park, and not in the smaller neighborhood parks. He asked to be consulted with regard to the paint choices chosen for the back side of the mesh signs. In addition, Edmondson suggested the City be allowed to review the types of advertising allowed on the signs. He did not want to see inappropriate advertising for liquor or tobacco in the parks. Nielsen stated that the City could not really get into or limit the content of the advertising, due to freedom of speech. He indicated that the Ordinance must remain content neutral. Chair Norman stated that he would put the question to the City Attorney. He indicated that advertising is generally exempt from freedom of speech laws and maintained that the City should have a say over what is posted. Nielsen stated that he would run the question by the City Attorney and have information to provide the Planning Commission at their upcoming meeting. As the advertising is on City property and in view of children, the City might have content prevue. Robb agreed content was a big concern. He asked if the signs would be up all summer. Anderson stated that the signs should generally take a hiatus mid July to mid August during the off-season. Chair Norman reiterated his position that he did not agree with signs in the public parks. He did not like the direction this was going allowing commercial signage in mixed use public spaces. He also asked to see the financial accountability piece incorporated into the documents. If the little league is going to make money off of the public space, he wanted to have a record of where it goes. Norman stated, given the fact that, the little league came to the City originally looking for ways to fund scholarships, he felt it reasonable to see an accounting of whether that is where the money goes. Davis added that there should be a piece with regard to indemnification against theft. She stated that, she too, was very concerned about content and felt it was an inappropriate invasion of the public space. Having disregarded what both the Park and Planning Commission’s had recommended, she felt the City Council was opening a flood gate of issues. Davis stated she had a real disconnect with what the little league originally said they needed money for and the direction she heard them going during the park tour, building new batting cages and potentially a new concession stand. Quinlan asked whether the City could differentiate between the two ends of Freeman park. He felt the City was on a slippery slope. Nielsen stated that he could not differentiate between the ends of Freeman nor between sports programs, although the other organizations had not expressed an interest at this time to pursue advertising. Nielsen stated that if the neighborhoods express concern and enough complaints come in, the whole process could be unraveled as created now. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2009 PAGE 3 OF 6 Davis moved, Quinlan seconded, asking Nielsen to incorporate the Park Commission changes including indemnification for theft, content purview, financial accountability, color, size and height of signs into the documents. In addition, she stated that the Park Commission, in general, does not support the City Council’s initiative for advertising on the fences, but in an effort to compromise would review the revised document at its August meeting. Motion passed 6/0. Bailey interjected that the City Council approved 4/1 to go forward with the concept. He viewed the issues as aesthetics versus legal, and did not see a legal problem utilizing the facilities this way. He felt there was great synergy in the relationship, these sports organizations serve community and the local businesses appreciate a way to reach their customer base. Bailey believed staff had attached sound restrictions to ensure the public interest and that the signs themselves provide a lively decoration in the ball parks. 5. REPORTS A. Report on City Council Meeting of July 13, 2009 Bailey stated that the only park relevant item concerned the Community Center request by CRR’s Director Anderson for funding to update flooring and painting throughout. B. Update on Park Signs Anderson stated that she had provided the park sign designs to other contractors for additional bids. She stated that the original contractor had provided her with pricing for real stone faced pillars and a faux stone limestone center which was approximately twice the cost of the polystyrene signs which came in at $4000- 5000. Robb passed around a photograph of the Randy’s Sanitation sign from Delano and stated that the sign was very attractive. Anderson stated that she would return with a recommendation at the next meeting as well as a sample of the polystyrene stone for the Commission to view firsthand. C. Spring Survey Results Anderson shared the spring survey results from the ongoing online survey monkey survey and asked for comment. The Commissioners were intrigued by the results and encouraged staff to come back in August with a proposed fall survey for review. They asked Anderson to try to take a different approach in an effort to keep the survey interesting. With regard to interconnectivity, they suggested a question asking where folks might like to see additional trails within the park system, or where they like and walk currently. D. Update on Manor Pond Chair Norman reported that about 30 people from the Manor Park neighborhood, the Mayor, and Dick Osgood from the DNR, met at Manor Park prior to the evening meeting to discuss the conditions of the Manor Park pond. It was the opinion of many of the neighbors that the quality, appearance, and condition of the pond had deteriorated significantly over the past few years and they wished to see what could be done. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2009 PAGE 4 OF 6 Chair Norman stated that Mr. Osgood, as well as, Julie Westerlund of the Watershed stated that the pond was functioning as was designed, as a stormwater pond whose quality and water level fluctuate year to year. Norman suggested the Commission ask staff to test the water quality and make a recommendation with regard to a chemical solution or dredging. He urged staff to meet with Public Works Director Brown and/or Engineer Landini to consider the alternatives, find out what the stormwater management plan is, what the timetable for dredging and maintenance is, and ask why fill had been dumped in the pond on two occasions to save a plow. Davis stated that there are many ponds within the west metro that are in similar situations and that the City must ensure the piping is cleared out in order to get the silt cleaned out from time to time. Norman also suggested the aerator be removed from the development near the pond who seems may be exacerbating the problem. 6. APPROVE REVISED DONATION REQUEST FORM The Commission complimented staff on the changes, stating the document was more clear and concise at this presentation. Bailey suggested the document thank the donor for their contribution. Davis moved, Edmondson seconded, recommending approval by the City Council of the revised donation request forms with the addition of ‘thank you for your donation’ at the documents conclusion. Motion passed 6/0. 7. REQUEST FOR FUNDING FOR 2010 ARCTIC FEVER EVENT Chair Norman stated that the Arctic Fever committee would like to ask the City Council for funding for the event. Having proven itself over the past several years, Norman felt a contribution of $1500 was warranted. Anderson reminded the Commission of staff’s previous explanation from April, which stated that the committee could make the request but the City Council would likely direct the Commission to redefine their own budget to allow for the expense, for instance, something else would have to give if this was deemed more important. Chair Norman stated that the Park Commission will need to set aside more funding, in general, if it is going to enhance or build programming in 2010 He noted that a higher level of contributions will be required and dedicated to grow this piece of the park and rec program. Anderson explained that the City Council contributes $45,000 to Parks annually, which is generally put into the CIP for the ‘bricks and mortar’ within parks. She suggested the Commission make a recommendation or request the City Council make a contribution to the general fund of $X from the $45,000 given to parks to specifically be set aside for funding park programming. For example, instead of the entire $45,000 going to the CIP, $2500 of that is set aside in the general fund for programming, and $42,500 is deposited into the CIP. Bailey believed the Commission could make such a request that this piece be put into the general fund or operations budget to fund programming specifically, as opposed to the entire amount going to the CIP. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2009 PAGE 5 OF 6 Since the funds must always come from somewhere, he questioned what they would be losing if they chose to take the funds out of their own budget in this way. Chair Norman stated that he would make the request as the liaison at the next City Council meeting that the Council holds back $2500 from the CIP contribution to be allocated to the operations budget to specifically enhance programming for 2010. 8. REVIEW AND APPROVE 0-2 YEAR PARK RENEWAL SCHEDULE Anderson shared the pricing estimates for the 2009-2010 park renewal schedule as discussed at the previous Commission meeting. She asked the Commissioners to begin to prioritize their improvements and make a formal recommendation to the City Council to be used in the budgeting process, based on a rough CIP budget of $150,000. Once the Commissioners reviewed their priorities on a park by park basis, Chair Norman urged the Commissioners to narrow down their list to the top 4-6 for all parks that could be accomplished in the next 0-2 years. Upon review of the Commission’s top priorities for each of the parks, Anderson indicated that they had far exceeded any CIP budget that existed and urged the Commission to realistically reconsider which were their top priorities. Davis moved, DeMers seconded, recommending their top priorities to the City Council for review including: 1) Park Signs – budgeted for $30,000 2) Bike Racks 3) Silverwood Park Shelter 4) Remodel Manor Park Shelter/Warming House 5) Upgrade Badger warming house with paint, roofing, siding 6) Install Rustic Trails – at Badger and Silverwood 7) Tennis Court overlay For an estimated $80,000 from the CIP budget. Motion passed 6/0. A. Review Questionnaire For Open House on July 15 Anderson shared a draft questionnaire and playground element option boards to be posted at the Open th House on July 15. The Commission thought it would be useful to provide the questionnaire and thought the playground options a fun addition to the open house. 9. DISCUSS PRESENTATION FOR OPEN HOUSE ON JULY 15 AND DETERMINE WHO WILL BE ATTENDING Anderson, Chair Norman, and each of the Commissioners indicated that they would be present at the open house. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2009 PAGE 6 OF 6 10. DISCUSS THE ROLE OF THE PARKS WITH THE SOUTH SHORE CENTER Chair Norman indicated that with the Community Center being run by Anderson and CRR, there would be more opportunities to enhance park programming. Although separate from the parks department, Anderson urged Commissioners to share their ideas for the Community Center and explained that she was recruiting for an advisory committee to assist her with programming ideas for the center. Davis shared her interest in assisting the effort. 11. DETERMINE LIAISON FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON JULY 27, 2009 th Chair Norman volunteered to liaison for July 27. 12. NEW BUSINESS Chair Norman asked if staff had spoken to the contractor regarding Eddy Station and what the person had to say about the variation in color. Anderson stated that she had spoken to the contractor and that he indicated that during his initial visit to the th site he failed to notice that the 4 side was sealed differently than the other three. She stated that clearly the contractor should have made a call from the site when he discovered that it was going to be more involved than originally thought in order to give the City a chance to decide whether they were willing to pay for the additional work required. The contractor, Eclipse painting, stated that while three sides were polyurethane th tinted stain and 4 side and under the canopy was done in a polyurethane varnish and sealed natural. He th chose to sand and restain the three sides and simply sand ad reseal with the natural varnish on the 4 side. Chair Norman stated that, in his opinion as well as many others, this is poor and he asked whether the City could ask the contractor to come back and do it right. Anderson stated that she could contact Eclipse and tell them the City would like to have been contacted mid process to make the call on how to proceed. She said she would ask whether they would make it right, at what cost, cost of materials or what, since the City is unhappy with the result and report back to the Commission. 13. ADJOURN Davis moved, DeMers seconded, adjourning the Park Commission meeting at 10:10 p.m. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Kristi B. Anderson Recorder