HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks and Recreation - 06/04/2007 APPROVED MINUTES
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MONDAY,JUNE 4, 2007 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: John Brill, Chair; Geri Napuck(arrived at 7:10
P.M.), Vice Chair; Rob Barrett(arrived at 7:10
p.m.), Lee Elliott-Stoering, Jeffrey Gerst, Randy
Jacobus (arrived at 7:08 p.m.), Ian Mackay and Joan
Oko
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Bierman
COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT: Jay Lotthammer, Parks and Recreation Director;
Stu Fox, Parks and Natural Resources Manager;
Laurie Obiazor, Recreation Services Manager; and
Carol Pelzel, Recording Secretary
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order by Chair Brill at 7:05 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion: Gerst moved, seconded by Elliott-Stoering, to approve the agenda as presented. The
motion carried, 5-0.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —MAY 7, 2007
Motion: Gerst moved, Oko seconded, to approve the May 7, 2007, Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources Commission minutes as published. The motion carried, 5-0.
IV. APPROVED MINUTES —MARCH 19, 2007
V. REPORT OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION—MAY 15
Lotthammer reported that at the May 15 Council meeting the Council authorized the approval of
the bids as recommended by the Construction Manager for the Community Center dasher boards,
fire sprinkler systems and electrical systems. Currently, all of the bids have come within budget
as originally approved.
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
June 4, 2007
Page 2
VI. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION—MAY 14 AND MAY 22, 2007
Fox reported that at the May 14 Planning Commission meeting the Commission discussed four
projects and three variances. One of the projects discussed involved Life Church located on
Valley View Road and Mitchell Road. This is an addition, but does not generate any cash park
fees.
On May 22 the Commission considered a project at Wilson Ridge Office Building at Valley
View Road and Flying Cloud Drive. This office project was approved and will generate cash
park fees. No other items considered by the Commission at that meeting involved park issues.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATION
A. OATH OF OFFICE FORM
Lotthammer distributed the oath of office form to the Commissioners and asked them to sign
and return to him.
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. GEOCACHING IN CITY PARKS
Fox presented a brief update as to what has occurred with geocaching since the
Commission's last meeting when individuals requested some format for geocaching within
the City's parks. He explained that the City is not opposed to these activities but they want to
make sure that the participants are not suspicious to park users and since there are some
sensitive areas within the parks, staff wants to make sure they stay away from those areas.
Fox reported that staff and Commissioners Elliott-Stoering and Oko met with the people
requesting that they be allowed to do geocaching in the City's parks. They plan to meet again
and to have a recommendation to the Commission at their July meeting. Fox said they went
through a list of the parks and discussed the pros and cons of those parks and the likes and
dislikes with the rules and regulations drafted. It was a very positive meeting and Fox said he
feels they will be able to come up with something to everyone's satisfaction. This is
something the City will be able to promote as a recreational activity.
Elliott-S toering said it was a well attended and very productive meeting. The group
originally felt the City was anti-geocaching but it was made clear that the City is willing to
work with them. Oko said she also felt it was an informative meeting for everyone and
everyone involved was very cooperative.
B. BRYANT LAKE OFF-LEASH AREA
Lotthammer explained that at last month's meeting the Commission held a discussion on dog
parks in general. Decisions about the dog parks hinged on the impact of the dog park being
developed by the Three Rivers Park District at Bryant Lake. This park may relieve some of
the parks use and over use in Eden Prairie. Lotthammer said he had talked to Tom
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
June 4, 2007
Page 3
McDowell, the Assistant Superintendent of the Three Rivers Park District, regarding this
park and he indicated that they would soon be starting construction. Lotthammer said they
plan to begin construction in July with the intent to open late August. They may not be able
to determine the impact of this park on the City's dog parks until the middle of the summer.
Lotthammer indicated that they discussed incorporating as part of that plan a small dog area.
McDowell said they would be willing to construct a fenced area within the overall dog park
intended for smaller dogs.
Libby Hargrove, 12640 Sunnybrook Road, said she was excited about what the Three Rivers
Park District is going to do and she feels this park will answer some of their needs. However,
she said she does not feel that her own community is answering her needs since she feels the
Three Rivers Park District is a separate park entity. Hargrove said that at the Commission's
last meeting they talked about a fee for using the dog park and she does not remember
anything constructive or definite came out of that meeting. She would like to open that
subject up once again. If people want lights or other aesthetic things at the park they will
need money for those projects.
Lotthammer pointed out that included with the Commissioner's agenda material was
information received from the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association magazine. This
material included a chart and survey showing what other agencies and cities have policies
and fees and charges for their dog parks. At the county level, it appears that they are more
prevalent in having a special use fee. Lotthammer said staff would like to see what happens
at Bryant Lake before doing anything more with the City's dog parks. This would allow them
to be better able to make a future recommendation. He indicated what they can charge for
this use but may not recover the administrative costs incurred. Staff does not see generating
enough revenue for capital purchases. There are other ways to fund some of these projects
versus strictly collecting a user fee. Lotthammer said staff is not necessarily ready to make a
good solid recommendation other than to continue to analyze the use of the parks. Staff
should have a good analysis and recommendation by late fall or early next year.
Mackay said he feels that is too long of a time to wait. He said he would like to see some
more information regarding fees so that they can make some suggestions. Oko said she
agrees and feels that waiting until next year for any action is unacceptable to the people who
use the dog parks. Oko said it appears that not all of the cities that charge a fee for use of the
dog parks are included in the chart provided to the Commission. She offered to put
something together that is more comprehensive as to what surrounding communities charge
and to work with staff to see what is feasible. She would like to see something decided on by
early September.
Napuck said she would not be opposed to having more information regarding the fees
charged and what services are provided for those fees charged. Oko said it was her
understanding that the City had worked with an individual who had offered to put water in at
the dog park. She pointed out that water is one of the biggest concerns that dog owners
currently have. Oko asked if staff has any idea as to what it would cost to have water
available at the park.
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
June 4, 2007
Page 4
Fox explained that the Parks Department did work with a private individual who had offered
to put water in at Staring Lake Park but withdrew his offer. Sewer and water is not available
at this park and it would require drilling a well which would also require electricity for an
estimated cost of$20,000 to $25,000 to provide water for that facility. They could proceed
with that project if this individual would come forward with $25,000. Where the parks are
located there is no ready access to do typical household water services.
Jacobus questioned why they couldn't do something like they did at the garden plots by
bringing in water tanks to the dog parks. Fox said using tanks opens up the possibility of the
water in the tanks being contaminated and causing harm to the dogs. The City would not
want to take on that liability. Fox explained that they did extend the water at the Senior
Center for their gardens but they did that with the understanding that they would increase the
fees to help pay for that. The increased garden fees do accommodate the water since they had
the original water source and only had to extend it.
Barrett asked if they could tap into the Grill house for water. Fox responded that a pressure
tank would be required because the water tank is located in the basement of the house.
Because of the distance, there would not be enough pressure in the tank to pump the water.
Fox said he appreciates the insight and questions but he does not feel it would be a practical
solution to run a line that long. It would cost several thousand dollars to trench the lines and
there would not be a strong enough water pressure point. Barrett suggested that they look
into using a water supply that is existing.
Brill asked that staff provide the Commission with additional information regarding other
cities' fee and revenue structure for dog parks and to look at options to get water down to the
Staring Lake dog park area.
X. REPORTS OF STAFF
C. DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
1. Camp Eden Wood Update
Lotthammer reported that City staff is currently working with Friendship Ventures in
developing a master plan for Camp Eden Wood. He presented a brief history of the
property explaining that today Friendship Ventures is using the property under a lease
that has 15 to 20 years left on it. They are looking to the future and want to upgrade
those facilities. Lotthammer said they have been having difficulty in making decisions
as to what is historical preservation and how best those facilities can meet the needs of
their users. The City has an obligation to protect those buildings and the land. He
indicated that it is important for Friendship Ventures to do upgrades to make it a usable
facility for them.
Lotthammer explained that there is the potential to seek funding through a State
bonding bill and the master plan would help in completing the application for this
funding. Staff feels this would be a good opportunity to bring in a consultant to create a
master plan that would meet the future needs of Friendship Ventures and to stay within
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
June 4, 2007
Page 5
the acceptable parameters of the City and the historic intent of the facility. Staff is
recommending that they contract with Brauer and Associates, a landscape architect and
planning firm to create a long-range plan for this facility.
Elliott-Stoering asked if the cost for this plan would be shared between the City and
Friendship Ventures. Lotthammer explained that the City has committed to funding the
contract. They anticipate the cost to be somewhere in the neighborhood of$40,000 or
less. Fox explained that the master plan would be a plan for the entire site and would
make sure that anything that is done in the future is done according to this master plan.
The City does have some concerns regarding this site because of historical designations
and they are concerned how it is developed and preserved.
Napuck pointed out that there were some landscaping changes made to the grounds that
were made by Friendship Ventures. She asked if this $40,000 contract is part of redoing
some of that or if this is working around it. Fox responded that Friendship Ventures did
bring in a lot of fill to this site without the City's permission or a Watershed District
permit. He explained that part of this whole process would be to have Brauer look at
what has been done to determine if they have to go back to the Watershed District for
approval or if they have to remove the fill and replace it with something else. This
master plan is not only a plan for the future but will evaluate what has been done and
what needs to be done to comply with regulations.
Napuck expressed some concerns with the rope course that is located on this site. She
asked if the City would be liable for any injuries because the City owns the property.
Lotthammer said the rope course does appear to be safe and in the lease, the City is
indemnified and Friendship Ventures is required to carry the necessary insurance. Fox
pointed out that the City is also named on Friendship Ventures policy as insured.
Lotthammer said when staff meets with Friendship Ventures, they will ask them to
review the draft report and to identify the buildings located on the site and to give an
update on these buildings as the report evolves. They are trying to capture a summary
of the facility. Lotthammer asked if the Commissioners have any concerns about the
process and staff working with Brauer in developing a master plan. The cost will be
approximately $40,000 to create the master plan and to seek funding through the State
bonding bill. Fox said the plan would be more than a site plan but would also include
sensitive use of the buildings.
Barrett asked what would happen if they didn't move forward with this request. He said
it seems like a lot of money on something that is not accessible to Eden Prairie
residents. Fox responded that this facility does provide disabled youth from Eden
Prairie and the entire metropolitan area access. This is a regional based facility.
Lotthammer explained that this is a City owned facility and has a historical registration
status. The Friendship Ventures use could go away in 15 or 20 years. There are things
that have to be done at this site. Some of the buildings need repairs and it is best that
they work together with Friendship Ventures to get this accomplished. A master plan
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
June 4, 2007
Page 6
will give everyone a better guide so that they understand the issues and how to make
the buildings usable. They may even determine that some of the buildings don't have a
registry status and they could be removed. The master plan will address preserving this
site. Brill questioned if funds are obtained through the State bonding bill, could that
money be put towards this proposal. Lotthammer said he did not think it could since the
money has been expended. The $40,000 would be the City's contribution. Part of that
fee would be for the completion of the application for the State bonding money and
without a plan Lotthammer said he was not sure they would have enough information
to complete the application for the money.
Napuck said it appears that there was a historic plan in place that Friendship Ventures
did not follow. She asked how this proposed master plan would be different from the
historic plan. Lotthammer responded that the historic plan was originally done and
submitted by Friendship Ventures and staff questions whether or not this plan met the
historical intent of SHIPPO requirements. This historical plan was submitted in 1998.
This was a very cursory master plan. Friendship Ventures did develop a plan to
remodel and fix up some of the buildings at this site. They submitted the plans to the
City and then did not follow those plans and did their own remodeling. Fox said it is
important to develop a master plan that all partners involved agree on and to make sure
that if there is grant money available everyone agrees that this is the plan that will be
followed.
Barrett asked what would happen if Friendship Ventures left and whose responsibility
would it be to maintain the historical status of this site. Fox responded that the City
would have to try to find another vendor to operate the camp in its current capacity.
The property could revert back to Hennepin County if they do not find someone to run
the program. Some of the buildings on this site are on the national historical
preservation list and there are some qualifications. He stated that part of this evaluation
would give the City clear direction on historical preservation. It would show the
viability of these buildings and at what cost. It would give the City a full evaluation of
the site so that they can make an educated projection as to the costs they are looking at
to maintain the buildings and what other alternatives there might be. Barrett said he
believes there are a lot of residents who are tired of preserving old buildings.
Mackay said he feels they have an asset that doesn't appear to be properly managed.
Jacobus asked why they couldn't ask Friendship Ventures to redo their plan and
questioned why the City has to spend $40,000 to develop a new plan. Lotthammer
explained that Friendship Ventures does not have the knowledge or expertise to
develop a master plan and this new plan would incorporate the City's desires and
wishes and their long-term goals. Fox pointed out that he does not believe that
Friendship Ventures is obligated under their lease to prepare such a master plan if they
don't plan any changes. The City has an opportunity to make this a better place for
everyone. If they don't go forward with this proposal they won't know how long they
can operate this program as is. Friendship Ventures would have to follow this plan as a
partner with the City.
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
June 4, 2007
Page 7
Elliott-Stoering asked if a Commission member could work on this mater plan as well
as someone from the Heritage Preservation Commission. Fox explained that Brauer
would bring in people from both the City and Friendship Ventures to work on this.
There would be a number of public meetings and with staff and they can certainly
include any Commissioners that are interested. Elliott-S toering said they are committed
to having this site serve families with disabilities and this is separate from their
commitment to the historical preservation of this site. Fox said they are utilizing
historical buildings for this project and they need to address making those buildings
handicap accessible and they need to make sure they are not doing it in such a way that
they jeopardize any State grant money. This plan will bring all of that together to make
sure they have a camp that functions, that the buildings are safe and to determine how
much they can do in the future.
In response to a question from Napuck, Lotthammer explained that their ultimate
expectations for this plan is that the City and Friendship Ventures would come to an
agreement that these are the guidelines that will need to be followed. When Friendship
Ventures approaches the City to make changes to the site, they will have to follow
these guidelines.
Motion: Brill moved, seconded by Napuck, to recommend to the City Council to
authorize Brauer and Associates to create a master plan to meet the future needs of
Camp Eden Wood and stay within acceptable parameters of the City and the historic
intent of the facility. The motion carried, 5-3 with Barrett, Jacobus and Oko voting nay.
2. Cedar Hills Clubhouse Status
Lotthammer reported that at the May 7 Parks Commission meeting staff was requested
to provide an update to the Commission regarding the status of Cedar Hills Clubhouse.
He explained that the clubhouse is part of the housing development that staff expects
will be brought to the City for plan review in the near future. It is expected that now
that the Prospect Road alignment has been agreed upon, the developer will move
forward with this project. At this time, Staff does not have detailed information as to
what is planned for the clubhouse. They anticipate having more information for the July
or August meeting. What the Commission saw a year ago was a concept plan.
3. Commission Calendar
Lotthammer said staff has developed a calendar for the Commission. He would like to
develop a work plan early on rather than just taking what comes their way.
Brill mentioned that Napuck will be making a presentation to the City Council at their
June 19 meeting and he asked that Commission members attend that meeting if they are
able to do so.
The Commission agreed to meet on July 16 rather than July 2. They will have a brief
meeting beginning at 6 p.m. and after that take a tour of City park facilities.
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
June 4, 2007
Page 8
Brill said he had received an inquiry from Dan Kittrell asking when the City Council
would be considering the naming of the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area. Lotthammer
explained that this item would be considered at the June 19 Council meeting. The
Council's agenda material will include the Commission's comments and Kittrell's letter
is part of the record as well.
Mackay asked for an update on MAC and the soccer fields located on their property.
Fox explained that the expansion of the Flying Cloud fields and Cedar Hills
Neighborhood Park are still in the waiting mode. Staff has yet to see any thing
regarding this but anticipate something coming forward now that Northwest Airlines
has emerged from bankruptcy. Fox also explained that right now because of
commitments made to the Community Center, there are no park dedication fees
available for other projects until they receive funds from various projects. They will
have to find $900,000 of funding to acquire a 30-year lease for the Cedar Hills Park
area and may have to delay development until 2010. There is money available from the
referendum to expand Flying Cloud fields.
B. MANAGER OF RECREATION SERVICES
1. Grants Awarded
Lotthammer reported that the Parks and Recreation Department recently received
funding from four grant applications to improve programs, facilities and services to
better serve the citizens of Eden Prairie. Additional information regarding these grants
was included in the Commissioner's agenda material.
2. FYI: Community Center Construction News—June
3. FYI: Concert Series "Sounds Around Town
4. FYI: Round Lake Beach Grand Re-Opening Party
5. FYI: Fishing Derby
6. FYI: Arts & Antiques in the Garden
C. MANAGER OF PARKS AND NATURAL RESOURCES
IX. NEXT MEETING
The next regular meeting of the Commission is scheduled for Monday, July 16, 2007 at 6:00 p.m.
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
June 4, 2007
Page 9
X. ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Jacobus moved, Mackay seconded, to adjourn the meeting. The motion carried 8-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.