Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks and Recreation - 04/04/2005 APPROVED MINUTES PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MONDAY,APRIL 4, 2005 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: John Brill, Tom Bierman, Tom Crain, Jeffrey Gerst, Ian Mackay and Geri Napuck COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Rob Barrett, Randy Jacobus and Michael Moriarity COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks and Recreation Services; Laurie Obiazor, Manager of Recreation Services and Carol Pelzel, Recording Secretary STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES: Cole Johnson I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chair Gerst at 7:05 p.m. Lambert introduced new Commission member Geri Napuck who was appointed to the Commission for a term expiring March, 2008. Bierman thanked City staff for all of the information they provided the Commission with regards to the proposed referendum. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion: Brill moved, seconded by Bierman, to approve the agenda as presented. The motion carried, 6-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —March 7, 2005 Motion: Bierman moved, seconded by Mackay, to approve the minutes of the March 7 joint meeting of the Eden Prairie City Council and Parks Commission as published. The motion carried, 5-0-1, with Napuck abstaining because she was not in attendance at that meeting. Motion: Brill moved, seconded by Crain, to approve the minutes of the March 7 Parks Commission meeting as presented. The motion carried, 5-0-1, with Napuck abstaining because she was not in attendance at that meeting. PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 4, 2005 Page 2 IV. REPORT OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION—March 15, 2005 Lambert reported that the City Council awarded bids for playground construction at Edenvale and Overlook Parks as the Commission had recommended. The Council appointed Geri Napuck to the Commission and reappointed Barrett as Chair and Gerst as Vice-Chair. V. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATION A. REQUEST FROM THE EDEN PRAIRIE HOCKEY ASSOCIATION Lambert reported that staff received a request from the Eden Prairie Hockey Association asking them to look at the possibility of moving or removing the bleachers in the northwest corner of Rink II at the Community Center to allow space for installation of a practice shooting area at this location. Staff does have a number of questions regarding this request and they are asking the Commission for authorization to meet with the Association to evaluate their request. Lambert said staff wants to be sure this is something the City's building staff would approve and that fire exits are not blocked. They also need to determine how and when it would be used and if it would be used in conjunction with renting ice time. Staff would come back to the Commission in May with a recommendation and with more specific information. In response to a question from Mackay, Lambert explained that this is the only location to consider this practice area because everything else is rather tight. Lambert explained that the participants would not be on skates and would not take up ice time. This use is similar to kick board for soccer. Crain asked if this is standard at most rinks. Lambert explained that it is not standard but more and more hockey associations are renting time from private organizations for dry land training, or developing their own dry land training areas. Motion: Brill moved, seconded by Mackay, to authorize staff to meet with the representative from the Eden Prairie Hockey Association to evaluate the request to provide a practice shooting area in the northwest corner of the Olympic rink at Eden Prairie Community Center. Bierman said he would like to see the words "dry land" added after the word practice. Brill and Mackay had no objection to the friendly amendment. The motion carried as amended, 6-0. VI. OLD BUSINESS VII. NEW BUSINESS A. APPROVE UPDATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Lambert explained that the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a guide for the City Council and Commission. All of the projects listed beyond this year and even some of this year's projects do not have plans and specifications, therefore, the estimated costs are only guesstimates based on history as to costs and revenue. The costs may vary greatly. Lambert further explained that there are limitations on what park dedication funds may be used for. PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 4, 2005 Page 3 The CIP also shows some of the future projects and if a referendum is passed, some of those projects will change in priority. The first two years of the Plan is pretty accurate. Lambert said staff is asking the Commission to approve the concept of these projects. They are not approving any one expenditure, but they are approving the proposals for 2005. Motion: Crain moved, Bierman seconded, to approve the updated Capital Improvement Plan as a concept approval for expenditures of anticipated revenue over the next five years. Brill asked where the projects for updating playground equipment are listed. Lambert explained that those projects come out of the City's General Fund. The General Fund has been paying about$55,000 a year for playground replacement and $125,000 a year for trail replacement. Vote was called on the motion with all members present voting aye. The motion carried, 6-0. B. APPROVE TRAIL PROJECTS FOR 2005 Lambert explained that Councilmember Aho indicated that he was not comfortable with making recommendations for a referendum without seeing the whole picture. Lambert said they need to take a look at the Park Fund, General Fund, trail projects and all of the current projects they are planning for their funding resources. Lambert stated that the list of trail projects is an extensive list and difficult to evaluate. Therefore, staff has broken the trail projects into different categories including new transportation trails, repair or replace existing transportation trails, new park trails and repair existing park trails. Lambert explained that they also have a category for soft surface trails. The City has approximately four or five miles of soft trails in the park system with 10 to 15 miles planned for the future. These trails are relatively inexpensive to construct and to maintain unless a lot of bridges or retaining walls are required. The soft trails are planned for the creek valleys. Lambert said the City's trail maintenance staff provides a condition report and assigns a safety evaluation. Based on that criteria, staff has listed the ten projects for this year. Money is budgeted for these trails at this time. Approximately $125,000 is carried forward year to year and they currently have approximately $300,000 for trails in the budget right now. Napuck pointed out that a petition had been received from Homeward Hills' residents asking that their trail reconstruction be moved up in priority. She asked where this project is at this time. Lambert responded that it is scheduled for 2006. The petition was received last year after this Commission took action on the trail projects. This project will cost approximately $300,000. If they did the Homeward Hills trail at this time they would not be able to do any other trail projects. Lambert said he feels this project is a good project for the referendum list. Napuck asked if the trails are evaluated on an annual basis and as a result of those evaluations, could the projects be moved up in priority. Lambert responded that the projects' priority could be changed as a result of those evaluations. Crain asked if the Technology Drive transportation trail proposed for construction by the developer includes any attachments. Lambert responded that an estimated cost was not included on the list for this project because of proposed development in this area. The developer will make the connection from the end of the trail by Costco east to Lake PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 4, 2005 Page 4 Idlewild Trail. Staff has recommended acquisition of Rosemount Park. If that is acquired, they will be able to make a connection all of the way around the lake. Mackay asked if trails north of Mitchell Lake are included on the list. He said he feels these trails need repair. Lambert said they are not. There are other trails that may need to be repaired, especially those around the marsh. Crain asked how staff decides when a trail is paved. Lambert explained that it is based on traffic volume and the character of the trail. Motion: Gerst moved, Mackay seconded, to approve the proposed schedule of trail projects identified for 2005 as listed in the April 4 memo to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. The motion carried, 6-0. C. FULL ACCESS TO PURGATORY CREEK RECREATION AREA Lambert explained that staff is asking for approval to begin the process for construction of full vehicle access to the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area. This project is one of the items listed on the recommended list for 2005 trail projects the Commission approved in the previous item. Lambert further explained that due to the soil conditions at the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area, a temporary right-in/right-out access was developed with the first phase development of that area. Soils engineers have indicated that full access may be developed at any time. Motion: Bierman moved, seconded by Crain, to recommend authorization to prepare plans, specifications and bids for construction of full vehicle access to the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area. The motion carried, 6-0. D. SKATE PARK EXPANSION AT ROUND LAKE PARK Lambert reported that the 2005 Capital Improvement Program for the Parks and Recreation Department includes the installation of approximately $35,000 of additional skate park equipment to the Round Lake Park facility. This information is being provided to the Commission for informational purposes only and the Commission does not need to take any formal action. Lambert explained that staff did send invitations to students at Oak Point, CMS and the High School to provide input on the expansion of the skate park. They did receive some good input and have sent out request for proposals for the project. Bids will be presented to the Commission at the May meeting. VIII. REPORTS OF STAFF A. DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION 1. Referendum Considerations PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 4, 2005 Page 5 Lambert explained that this is the second step of the process to consider whether or not a referendum should be held and if so, how it should be done. The various categories for the referendum have been broken into four parts. The first is Community Center Improvements. Pool options would be considered only with a Community Center expansion. The other categories are Park Acquisition and Improvements, and Trail Construction. Lambert reviewed with the Commission the Community Center Improvements that would be funded by a referendum. The proposed cost for those improvements would be $6,950,000. Additional improvements including the play space, third rink option and outdoor fun pool are proposed to be funded by Revenue Bonds and Hockey Association donations. Lambert explained that staff has talked about changing the operation of the Community Center to an Enterprise Fund, which means it would be operated like a business and would have to pay for its own operation. Lambert indicated that the proposed outdoor rink has been moved to the north side of the building. It was originally planned for the west side, which required removing the High School parking lot. The Hockey Association has raised approximately $250,000 and they believe they can raise an additional $250,000. The total project cost is approximately $2 million. This would be an outdoor rink with a shed roof and a chain link fence around the rink. It could be a concrete base rink and used for something else in the summer. Footings will be put in so that walls could be put up when additional money is raised. If revenue bonds are used to fund a portion of this project, the amount of revenue generated to pay off these bonds will depend on what the Hockey Association agrees to pay for ice time. If a referendum for this project is passed, it may not happen until they receive funding from the Hockey Association. Lambert explained that in Community Center Proposal A they are proposing a wading pool similar to what the City of Edina added to their pool. This improvement to the facility in Edina generated enough revenue to cover the construction costs and the operating costs as well as putting away a sufficient amount of excess revenue to pay for other pool improvements. Lambert said their wading pool would be connected to the indoor pool. Staff would want a pool consultant to tell them what the design should be in order to generate sufficient revenue. Lambert said they must consider whether or not they want a competitive pool or a recreational pool. If they deepen the pool it becomes a better competitive pool but a much less desirable recreational pool. In response to a question from Gerst, Lambert explained that the fun pool couldn't happen if the Community Center improvements do not occur. The third rink could possibly go with or without a referendum. Bierman asked what role the community plays in approving revenue bonds. Lambert said the City does not require taxpayer approval to issue revenue bonds. Staff will provide residents with information on what they are voting on. Bierman said as the information is presented this evening, it is very confusing. He suggested that a sheet be prepared informing the voters of what they are voting on and another sheet showing PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 4, 2005 Page 6 what other projects they are proposing to do. Lambert said they need to let the residents know that if the referendum is passed the City, at no cost to the taxpayer, could add other projects. Bierman said that they need to make it very clear as to what the residents are voting for on the referendum. He stated that they need to keep it as simple a referendum as possible. Lambert explained that Plan B for swimming pool improvements was developed with representatives from the Foxjets, Aquajets and School District. This option is similar to Plan A with the addition of a zero depth warm water recreational pool that would also have two water slides. Lambert said they would need to decide if they are going to make this a recreational or competitive pool. Residents have said they want a recreational pool in Eden Prairie but staff is not sure they are willing to pay for it. The swimming pool should be a separate question and their best chance of getting improvements to the Community Center is to also have that as a separate question. Napuck asked if staff feels an indoor pool would be able to recoup its operating costs. Lambert said it would not. Indoor pools do not pay for themselves. They do,however, feel that the Community Center revenues would increase by increased membership. They are confident that the net cost of the Community Center would not change much with the other additions but it would change if a pool were added because of the high cost for running an indoor pool. Brill asked if staff has talked to other communities who have indoor pools regarding costs and revenue. Lambert said they have and the pool operators have indicated that it is not a moneymaker. People who use the pool enjoy it and the heaviest use is during the first year. Features are added to the pool every couple of years to keep up the interest in using the pool. Brill said with regard to Plan B, it is his opinion that that may end up being the sacrificial lamb of a three-part question. It may be defeated but at least it will be separate from the rest of the questions. Mackay asked if Oak Point Pool could be renovated or customized to make it more useful for competitive swimming. Lambert said they discussed making the existing pool recreational and converting Oak Point pool to competitive. The School District would have to convert the water slide pool to a diving well. They might not want to do that for an intermediate school. There is also not enough space to make the Oak Point pool a recreational pool. Lambert also questioned making the City's recreational pool at a school where the public would have limited access to it. Lambert reviewed with the Commission Plan B, which is similar to the Plan A improvements to the Community Center,plus Plan C with the additional warm water zero-depth recreational pool with the water slide and the expansion of the existing six— lanes from 25-meters to 50-meters with a bulkhead to accommodate 25-yard events and additional spectator seating. PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 4, 2005 Page 7 Napuck asked if Plan A deals with the Community Center and with the deepening of the pool, which is something competitive swimmers want. Lambert said that was correct. Staff is trying to develop a plan that will make the pool pay its own way. Mackay asked if they could expand the recreational program at Oak Point Pool. Lambert responded that the City uses it now the maximum amount of time that it is available. If they were to expand their program, it would have to be during the school day. Gerst asked if Plan B allows for more time available for swimming lessons. Lambert said it would. Plan B activity pool would have about 88 degree water and they would have preschool age swimming programs in that pool. Gerst said Plan A assumes the deepening of the pool. He suggested that they eliminate that from Plan A but keep it in Plans B and C. Bierman said it is important to inform the voters that what is being proposed for the referendum is much less than what was voted on last year. Gerst said he was leaning towards Option B. Option C is nice if money were no object. Option B would still deepen the pool and the competitive swimming issues would be addressed and they would also have a recreational pool. Crain asked what the cost difference would be for each plan per resident or per homeowner. Lambert responded that Plan B would cost the average homeowner$34 a year and Plan C would cost$38 per year. Gerst said he is not convinced that Option B would pass but he is comfortable with putting it forward as an option. He would like to see the deepening of the pool removed from Option A and moved to Option B. Gerst said he feels that Option A is really more of a need while Options B and C are more of a plus. Brill said he is concerned about putting pool improvements on a referendum. He feels they are risking that question and other questions. Lambert explained that 51 percent of the residents said the City should be providing recreational opportunities for swimming other than lakes. Lambert said he thinks they have to give the residents the opportunity to vote on a pool. Mackay said he agrees that Option B is a good option to discuss. He said he personally does not feel comfortable with recommending anything to the City Council without spending more time discussing these options with the community. Mackay said he thinks that a forum or several small forums should be held to present these ideas to the public prior to a referendum to get some feeling from the people who would be using these facilities. These residents would indicate whether or not they would support a referendum and that they understand the recommendations. After those meetings are held, they would go back to the City Council and tell them that this is what we recommend and what we could support. Lambert said he agrees, but this group has to scale back the options they talk to the public about. The Commission has to decide PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 4, 2005 Page 8 whether or not Option B is the option to present to the community. They have to have a concept plan. Lambert indicated that timing is very important and they don't have a lot of time to do public meetings. It is a good idea to have a town meeting on a referendum. Mackay said he feels they need a couple forums; one for the general public and one for users. Gerst said he is comfortable with moving forward with Options A and B combo with eliminating the pool deepening option from Option A and adding it to Option B. Motion: Motion was made by Mackay, seconded by Gerst, to recommend that pool deepening be eliminated from Option A Community Center Improvements and added to Option B for Swimming Pool Improvements and that the Commission recommend the Option A Community Center Improvements and Option B for discussion with the public and City Council. Lambert said the public meeting should be to discuss the swimming pool improvements and not the improvements proposed to the Community Center. Mackay said he thinks the real question is whether or not they should have a referendum. He said he is hoping that they will get the reinforcement they need for a referendum from these public hearings. Lambert said they need to have a focused question or questions for the public to discuss. Mackay said he feels they should lay out their plan and let the public react to it. Crain said if any item looks extravagant, that is what needs to be discussed at the public meetings. Bierman said his concern is that they may have very few people attend these public meetings to express their opinions. He asked about the other thousands of residents and their opinion. Bierman pointed out that they already have had one survey and process. Bierman said he feels they have to move forward without a public meeting. Gerst said he is in favor of a public meeting but discussion should be focused on Options A and B. He said he did not feel a few people showing up at these meetings would affect his decision or anyone else's. They are still looking at what is best for Eden Prairie but maybe one of those people will have a point of view or thought that would help the process. He suggested they take that information and move forward from there. It is this Commission's responsibility to move forward and investigate the referendum. Vote was called on the motion with all members present voting aye except Bierman who voted nay. The motion carried, 5-1. Lambert reviewed with the Commission the referendum proposal for Park Acquisition and Improvements. He indicated Staff is asking for authorization to send notices to residents within the service areas of Forest Hills Park, Edenvale Park and Prairie View Park to obtain input from neighborhoods regarding the proposed changes prior to making any decisions on park acquisition or improvements for a referendum. Lambert said they should discuss the acquisition of Rosemount Park. The City is doing a major center area study and they are discussing creating a focus for a downtown and there is a PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 4, 2005 Page 9 park and lake right there. The park would have to be purchased. All indications of earlier studies are that it is critical to create unique spaces in downtown areas. Rosemount may or may not want to sell the park. Lambert asked if the Commission would be in favor of staff talking to Rosemount regarding acquisition of this park and whether or not it should be put on the referendum. He also asked for the Commission's recommendation on whether or not they should talk to the Roger's family regarding acquisition of Birch Island Woods. Mackay said he feels it is time they do the work and research on Idlewild Park and to get a response from the Roger's family. Lambert said in looking at the timing, it would be nice to have the preliminary work completed by the May meeting. Lambert said staff would also talk to the City's bond attorney regarding the use of revenue bonds. They also need to talk to the School District about the proposed improvements. Lambert said they would need to talk to the affected neighbors about these concepts before they talk to the general public so that they have a definitive plan. Bierman suggested that City staff talk to the Rosemount Company to see if they would be willing to donate the parkland to the City. Brill said he feels they were pretty vague on the last referendum for park acquisition. He felt they were not specific enough on what the money was going towards. Brill asked how this referendum would be different from the last one. Lambert responded that previously they talked about fixing up existing parks and making playground improvements. This is something that they need to think about doing with this referendum. Some of the money should be used to do some improvements to neighborhood parks and with this proposal they are looking at specific projects. Brill pointed out that most of the proposed improvements are north of Highway 5. He suggested that they consider including some playground improvements in other parts of the City. Lambert pointed out that these parks were all built first and the parks south of Highway 5 are newer. Mackay said he agrees that some improvement funds should be added to this list for consideration. Napuck asked if they intend to actually list specific park acquisition and improvements on the referendum. Lambert responded that the question on the referendum would be do you vote yes or no for park acquisition development. The information that is dispersed throughout the community prior to the referendum will be more specific. Crain said it is important that they remind the residents that if the referendum is passed,park improvements could be made within one or two years rather than five or six years. Motion: Motion was made by Brill, seconded by Mackay, to request staff to provide this information to the Mayor and City Council and recommend the Council direct staff to contact representatives of the School District to review options to be considered at Forest Hills Park and Prairie View Park and to send notices to residents within the service areas of Forest Hills Park, Edenvale Park, and Prairie View Park to obtain input from neighborhoods regarding proposed changes to their neighborhood park prior to making any decisions on park acquisition or improvements for a referendum. The motion carried, 6-0. PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 4, 2005 Page 10 Motion: Motion was made by Mackay, seconded by Brill, to ask City staff to investigate funds for general park upgrades and to bring back to this Commission a ballpark figure to potentially add to a referendum. The motion carried, 6-0. Lambert briefly reviewed possible trail improvement projects. He explained that if the City had an additional $2 million they could do a large number of projects and may possibly even complete the trail projects. Motion: Motion was made by Gerst, seconded by Mackay, to recommend $2 million for trail improvement projects to be considered as a separate question for a referendum. Brill asked if the request for trail funding would be a separate question on the referendum. He suggested that they not have too many questions and they do not want just one question. He suggested that they consider combining park acquisition and funding for trails as one question. Lambert said the number of questions to be placed on the referendum would be decided at a later date. Vote was called on the motion with all members present voting aye. The motion carried, 6-0. 2. Sports Facilities Committee Update Lambert reported that the Sports Facilities Committee met on March 16. They are still working on updating the Priority Use Policy and are reviewing the actual participant numbers of the Associations to verify what percentage of participants are Eden Prairie residents. 3. Status Report on the Creek Valley Trails Planning Process Lambert provided an update on the initial meeting with the Trail Planning Committee made up of citizens living within 1000-feet of Edenbrook Conservation. Area, Riley Creek Conservation Area and the Lower Purgatory Creek Conservation Area. B. MANAGER OF RECREATION C. MANAGER OF PARKS AND NATURAL RESOURCES IX. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Brill moved, Napuck seconded, to adjourn the meeting. The motion carried 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.