Loading...
090898 PK MIN CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PARK COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1998 7:30 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Puzak called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Puzak; Commissioners Bensman, Dallman, Arnst, Themig, Cochran (arrived 7:32), and Colopoulos (arrived 7:41); Administrator James Hurm; Council Liaison Roger Champa and Park Planner Mark Koegler Also present: Councilmembers O’Neill and Stover, and two residents. B. Review Agenda There were no changes to the agenda. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of August 11, 1998 Themig moved, Arnst seconded to approve the Minutes of the August 11, 1998 Park Commission Meeting as written. Motion passed 5/0 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor. 4. REPORTS A. Erica Hahn, Intern — Report on Ad Hoc Land Conservation Committee Erica introduced herself, explaining her background in forestry and her present role as an Intern with the City of Shorewood. She summarized the work of the Ad Hoc Land Conservation Committee and the results of their research in land protection options. They have also completed an inventory of undeveloped land within the City. The next step is to write a report and make recommendations to the City for implementation of a plan. Erica explained that the Committee is now seeking input from the Park and Planning Commissions. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 1998PAGE2 - Administrator Hurm stated that the authorizing resolution calls for the input from both Commissions, adding that the Park Commission needs to address its future role in the process. He offered suggestions for ways that the Park Commission may want to become involved. The Committee is hoping to be complete with its role in November. Chair Puzak asked who would continue the process once the Committee concludes its work and Erica has completed her internship. He stressed the need to learn from their work and then continue to drive the process. The Commission will wait for the final report and then perhaps recommend a subgroup be formed with representatives from the Commissions, City Council and community to continue the process. B. Report on Youth Coalition Meetings Chair Puzak reported that the August 27 Youth Coalition meeting was poorly attended. The group agreed to meet again on September 9. Puzak will attend that meeting. C. Report on Meeting with Soccer Association of August 27 Chair Puzak and Administrator Hurm met with the president of the Tonka United Soccer Association and one of the association’s staff. Puzak reported that he and Hurm reiterated the City’s concerns about safety, parking and intensive use of the fields. Puzak is confident that the soccer club will be a better user of the park by policing parking and spacing games to reduce traffic and wear and tear on the fields. Commissioner Bensman asked if the two groups will continue to meet. Puzak said that he has asked for the Soccer Association to assign liaisons to the Park Commission and has recommended three or four meetings per year. He also asked that the soccer club would communicate with the City when they will be holding tournaments and gave them a copy of the new tournament policy. Commissioner Arnst asked about the next meeting date and whether there will be similar meetings with all sports organizations who use the Shorewood parks. Themig pointed out that a meeting for all sports organizations has been planned for October. 5. DISCUSS THE CONCEPT OF CITY ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY EAST OF FREEMAN PARK AT 25720 STATE HIGHWAY 7 Chair Puzak complimented City Staff for the informative report which they provided on this matter. Administrator Hurm distributed a copy of the September 1, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes covering their discussion of this topic. He reported that they had come to the conclusion that there would not be a problem in terms of the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission is interested in the Park Commissions’ thoughts about the property’s potential for recreation. He added that, although the parcel is involved in a lawsuit between a developer and the City, it should be considered independently of that matter. Commissioner Colopoulos asked if the City Council has determined whether a purchase of the land fits in the Comprehensive Plan. He brought up the question of park user funding as a means of financing the purchase. Puzak replied that the Park Commission would need to seek input PARK COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 1998PAGE3 - from the sports organizations and also from the Land Conservation Committee about acquiring the land for open space. Commissioner Arnst cautioned that user funding may obligate the property be designated to special use. Commissioner Themig asked for clarification of how the Comprehensive Plan did or did not identify this land for possible park use. It was explained that, while the City was aware in the past that this land may potentially be available, it has not been an option until now. Commissioner Bensman noted that this has become a controversial piece of property. She questioned whether this is a good choice for investing in open space since Freeman Park is congested as it is. More fields would generate more traffic. She asked if other options should be considered and said that more information would be needed to decide if this property is best for park expansion. Puzak pointed out that there was once a request that the park entrance road off of Highway #7 could be moved to the east because it was too close to residential property to the west of Freeman. Part of the new property would be needed in order to create that safer access to the park. Hurm added that at the time this idea was considered, the amount of land needed was 20 or 30 feet more. Puzak asked if the land could serve two needs by being split with 30 feet of the 200 feet being used as a “buffer zone” and the rest of the property sold for some other purpose. He added that there has been a legitimate, documented interest in the 30 feet adjacent to the park for safety reasons. Colopoulos agreed that if the property were to be developed, a buffer zone would help prevent the potential squeeze of land between the park and future land use to the east. Commissioner Dallman noted that the property’s proximity to Freeman Park alone makes it desirable. He said that whatever future use would be determined by the City, it would be best to have that choice rather than to have regrets about other possible development of the land. Councilmember Jerry O’Neill spoke from the floor. He stated that this unique piece of property has been offered to the City and the opportunity is there to use for prairie preservation, communications tower, etc. The Park Commission is being asked to put ideas together to present to the public and to show the City Council what can or cannot be done with the property. Commissioner Themig stated that if the opportunity is there to acquire land next to a park, and if it is affordable, it should be purchased. Other issues about use of the land are long term. The decision of how to fund the purchase is the job of the City Council. Colopoulos added that the Park Commission needs to evaluate the exact use (whether parking, field space or whatever), and then they could strike a balance later. These are developmental questions that take time. He agreed that it is a positive opportunity. Themig said that multiple options should be considered because $237,000 is an expensive parking lot. He asked if there had been any community feedback on the issue of the land purchase. Hurm said that he is not aware of any made to City Hall. Commissioner Arnst asked about the status of the existing purchase agreement as noted in the letter from Attorney Mark Kelly. Hurm explained that the 30 day expiration term on the current agreement has not yet been initiated by the owners. Bensman reiterated her concern about possibly jeopardizing the City’s financial ability to develop trails, which residents have clearly asked for. She cautioned against using open space for ball fields or parking lots when the public PARK COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 1998PAGE4 - has indicated clear interest in open space and trails. Commissioner Cochran stated that the City’s desire in purchasing the land is to have control of its future, not to create a whole set of new problems. Puzak summarized that this could be viewed as a win-win situation. The need for a buffer space to the east of Freeman Park has been identified and this is the only opportunity to expand. The remainder of the land could be used for a scaled down development (i.e. 40 units instead of the once proposed 70). The City has an interest in pursuing the purchase and it could make it a well rounded acquisition. The Park Commission has a guarded, but general interest in pursuing this purchase. 6. TRAIL PLANNING PROCESS — NEXT STEPS. DISCUSSION WITH PARK PLANNER MARK KOEGLER IN PREPARATION FOR SEPTEMBER 21 WORK SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL Mark Koegler highlighted parts of his September 1 memo to the Park Commission, noting that much was learned from the planning process. He added that by working through the Citizen Review Group, Shorewood has made trail planning a grass roots effort. The point was made that Shorewood’s trail development needs to be identified as a “Trail Process” rather than a “Trail Plan”, indicating a strong element of flexibility. Another conclusion reached by the Citizen Review Group is that there are many obstacles and challenges to overcome in order to implement a trail system in Shorewood. The next step recommended by the group has three elements. The City Council and Park Commission need to: 1. Identify trails as a community goal. 2. Identify a process to achieve the goal. 3. Explore funding sources. Two points were clear to the Citizen Review Group. First, people want trails. The second is that this is not a black and white issue. The Park Commission and City Council together will need to endorse a process and create a statement of commitment. Koegler described a ten step process recommended by the Group, adding that one successful project makes the second easier and so on. He also noted that over time, things change and the process can be revisited. Overall, this process is more costly and time consuming than a decision and construction approach. Koegler reiterated the need to emphasize trail development as a process rather than a plan. Commissioner Themig asked about the use of TEA-21 Grants for funding. Koegler said that this is an exciting possibility to many and that the program has potential for this situation. He will watch for application process in the spring. Koegler also pointed out that the City has some money allocated for trail development. Commissioner Bensman enthusiastically supported the approach being taken. She likes the idea of group involvement and sees a lot of potential for success, even though it is more expensive and PARK COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 1998PAGE5 - labor intensive. Administrator Hurm commented that in the long run, it may not be more costly. Chair Puzak noted the many side benefits to all involved in the process as a learning experience. He stated that there is data that can be trusted. The way the issue of trails has been handled can also be trusted by residents. The next step is a scheduled joint work session with the City Council. Themig asked about the 1992 trail plan and if any of that data can be used in order to save money and time for the City. Koegler said that the 1992 plan is a piece of information to look at. One distinction from the current thinking is that the previous plan tied trials into roadway improvements. The Citizen Review Group recommends doing trails for the sake of trails. Not all of those designated routes are realistic, but it is a place to start. Hurm commented that the information already obtained will be combined with newly gathered information. He also reminded the Commission that CIP funds for trails decrease over time and that other resources for funding should be considered. Hurm asked if the Park Commission would like the City Council or someone else to work on the commitment statement. Puzak replied that it should be developed jointly from the good basis already provided by the Koegler and the Citizen Review Group. Themig asked how to include the involvement of community representatives without cluttering the agenda. Koegler suggested that within the perimeters defined by the City Council, a group could be assembled to oversee this. It shouldn’t be too cumbersome. Hurm and Koegler stated that they both see the Park Commission as the group to establish momentum through the beginning steps. Chair Puzak thanked Mark Koegler for his work and the report. 7. OLD BUSINESS Commissioner Themig asked about the status of the request for the purchase of a backup snowmobile. Administrator Hurm reported that the City Council is questioning the idea of funding a second snowmobile. He added that the Police Chief has said that grants are available for the cost of overtime pay and they anticipate receiving those funds again. The matter will be brought before the Coordinating Committee to see if expenses for a new sled can be shared by neighboring cities. Themig also asked for an update on the suggestion of recycle containers for the parks. One bid is pricing each container at $16 per month. With ten sites identified, this would be an additional expense for the City of $160 per month. Staff is still investigating options. Bensman commented that any expense is notable since there is no cost for the current method of “recycling” in the parks. Themig reported on the history brochure project. This will be worked on during September. 8. NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Cochran said that some residents have asked if anyone has explored the idea of a pedestrian overpass for the LRT where it crosses County Road 19. Puzak said that the plans for a PARK COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 1998PAGE6 - stop light at Smithtown Road and County Road 19 should help somewhat for crossing at the trail. Themig suggested a proposal to the Hennepin County Parks Board. This may be something which would qualify for a DNR grant as well. 9. ADJOURNMENT Bensman moved, Colopoulos seconded to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Connie Bastyr Recording Secretary