Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks and Recreation - 08/05/2002 APPROVED MINUTES PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MONDAY,AUGUST 5, 2002 7:00 P.M. City Center Council Chambers COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Munna Yasiri, Chair; Rob Barrett, Dick Brown, Jeffrey Gerst, David Larson, Trisha Swanson, and Philip Wright COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Therese Benkowski and Kim Teaver COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks and Recreation Services; Laurie Obiazor, Manager of Recreation Services, Carla Kress, Adaptive Recreation Coordinator and Carol Pelzel, Recording Secretary I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order by Chair Yasiri at 7:00 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Brown asked that an item be added to Reports of Staff. He asked that staff give the Commission a report on the cost to the City for the renovation of the Douglas-More House. Motion: Brown moved, Barrett seconded, to approve the agenda as amended. The motion carried 7-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Gerst moved, Swanson seconded, to approve the June 3, 2002, minutes as presented. The motion carried, 7-0. Brown asked that the last paragraph on Page 3 of the July 1, 2002, minutes be corrected to read "Community Center"pool rather than "Oak Point"pool in three locations of that paragraph. Motion: M/Brown, S/Gerst, to approve the July 1, 2002, minutes as corrected. The motion carried, 5-0-2 with Barrett and Larson abstaining because of absence from that meeting. IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. Petition to Replace Playuound Equipment Tot Lot on West Side of Round Lake PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION August 5, 2002 Page 2 Lambert explained that a petition had been received from residents on the west side of Round Lake requesting consideration for the replacement of playground equipment that has been removed by City staff. Monica Kaeding, 7571 Atherton Way, explained that she started the petition for the replacement of the park equipment in this area. The City removed this equipment for no apparent reason. Kaeding said their children used this playground equipment and they feel that they should have had some input on the removal of it. It was a very quiet place for toddlers and close to the houses in the neighborhood. The Round Lake Playground is inconvenient and out of their location. Kaeding said this equipment should not have been removed without any notice. They would like to have input on things that directly affect their neighborhood. Kaeding explained that they are requesting that this playground equipment be replaced and that they be notified as to what the City plans to do with this property. Barrett asked how far this park was from Kaeding's home and how far the proposed new playground equipment on Round Lake will be from their home. Kaeding indicated that the previous equipment was approximately 50 yards from her house and the replacement equipment would be one-half to three-quarters of a mile. Brown briefly reviewed the letter sent to the homeowners from the City's Director of Parks and Recreation. He explained that there appeared to be little or no use of the site for much of the time it has been in existence. The City was unable to obtain replacement parts for the equipment and the equipment no longer met the new safety guidelines for the tot lot structure. The City recently invested $90,000 in the new playground equipment on the east side of Round Lake, which is accessible by trail from the west side of the lake. The secluded site was used for a"hangout" for older children than for tot lot use by younger age children and staff does not recommend developing playground sites in secluded areas. John Goodrich explained that he lived in the neighborhood and that they had received the letter from the City after the equipment had been removed. He explained that he has no arguments for moving the park. His children said the park was boring. However, he asked for a commitment from the Commission to communicate with the citizens. Not being notified as to what was taking place was the most disturbing thing. The playground equipment disappeared overnight. Had the residents realized the equipment was in disrepair they may have been able to help. Also, the neighbors should have been notified that this site was being used as a hangout. The letter was very informative,however, it was received after the fact. Swanson asked what procedure the City uses in evaluating the various City parks. Lambert explained that the City has guidelines for evaluating playground safety and these guidelines were radically changed five years ago. Since that time, they have committed to the City Council that they would remove the highest risk equipment first. Lambert stated that the neighbor's complaint was that the City did not notify the neighborhood that they were going to remove the equipment. He explained that the letter was mailed after the fact and should have been sent to the neighborhood prior to their removing the equipment. Generally they notify the neighborhood and ask for discussion as to the City's plan for removal of the PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION August 5, 2002 Page 3 equipment. Since they are planning to upgrade playground equipment on the east side of Round Lake which is 400 yards north of this playground, and our standard is to have playgrounds within a half mile of all residents, it was their intent to notify the neighbors on that side and ask for their input. Notification should have been mailed to the neighbors prior to removing the equipment. Lambert explained that playground inspectors inspect the playground equipment weekly. This process has been going on for five years. The inspector inspecting this park indicated that he never saw anyone using the facility. Also, a number of years ago there had been complaints to the Police regarding the use of this site as a hangout. This has not been an issue in the last four or five years. Lambert indicated that the letter had been sent to approximately 400 homes. The City received three telephone calls after this letter was sent out. Two callers had signed the petition,however, they now support the rationale for removal of the equipment and would not have signed the petition had they known the reasons for removing it. The letter also asked the residents for their input as to what should be done with this site. The callers had no idea as to what it should be used for and indicated that they personally had not used the area. The third caller did not sign the petition and does not feel it was a good idea to replace the equipment. She agreed that it was a hangout over the years and it is a poor place for little children to go and play. Ben Kaeding, 7571 Atherton Way, explained that the land had originally been given to the City as part of the development for a playground. He stated that the way the site now looks it is an eyesore. The trees need to be cut back. He indicated that adding a park bench to the area would be nice. Kaeding said the way the park is now it would detract from the value of the neighborhood. Yasiri said that it appears that the resident's concerns regarding how the use of the park was measured and how it was determined that this park was a hangout was addressed this evening. However, there still appears to be the issue of communication. Yasiri explained that it is not unreasonable to have a lapse on the City's part and she suggested that perhaps a letter be sent to the residents expressing the City's regrets for not having notified them and ask that they indicate how they want to be involved in the development of the site on the east side of the Lake. Lambert explained that the letter sent on July 23 did ask for resident's input. They were invited to attend this meeting. No input has been received from the residents. Lambert said that Mr. Kaeding's suggestions are right on. Staff would anticipate planting some additional trees in this area and natural vegetation will occur on its own. Lambert said staff would send a notice to everyone in the area offering them the opportunity to assist in picking out playground equipment for the upgrade on the other site on the west side of Round Lake. Wright asked what the size of the tot lot was. Lambert responded that the one they are replacing was 50 feet by 60 feet. In response to a question from Barrett, Lambert explained that the park consisted of a climbing wood structure and swings. Barrett asked if there are any definite plans for this site. Lambert responded that there are none. That was one of the reasons for the letter. They asked for input or suggestions for this site. They did receive three calls with no suggestions. Lambert indicated that Mr. Kaeding's recommendations are what PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION August 5, 2002 Page 4 City staff was considering. They would plant trees and let this area become part of the woods. Staff is open to suggestions if anyone has strong opinions. Yasiri said that on behalf of the Commission she would like to express their regrets for not having notified the citizens in advance. The City works very hard to try to be very responsive to the citizens. Unfortunately, a lapse does occasionally occur. Lambert has committed to improve communications with the neighbors to make sure the information gets out and has invited the neighbors to make suggestions on improvements to be made to the site and what type of new equipment should be acquired. On behalf of the Commission, Yasiri thanked the residents for taking their time to come to this meeting. Because of citizens like them, the City is a better place to live. B. Request from Libby Hargrove Libby Hargrove, 12640 Sunnybrook Road, introduced herself and Cheryl Loose explaining that they are dog owners and they would like to see Eden Prairie come forth with an off-leash dog park. Hargrove stated that she is a long-term resident of the City and a goal of hers for the last couple of years is to have an off-leash dog park in the City. She stated that she is a dog owner, breeder, trainer and dog lover. Hargrove indicated that the off-leash parks concept is delightful and makes for overall good use of land in the community. Coming to this Commission with a petition showing community interest would probably be a good way to begin dialogue. She indicated that they did start a petition last week and they plan to present this petition to this Commission at their next meeting. Hargrove asked if there are any questions from this Commission that they should be prepared to address when they come back with the petition. Gerst asked if they had any particular park in mind. Hargrove responded that they did talk to Lambert and she believes he has three particular areas that should be looked at. As a taxpayer and resident, Hargrove said she has no preference. Of the people they have talked to, it has been indicated that they would prefer to have water included in the park. Hargrove stated that her first thought was land from the Airports Commission. She questioned if she as a resident or if this Commission should approach the Airports Commission for use of their land. Brown asked if they are talking about ten or 13-acre sites. He asked what the average size is of an off-leash park. Hargrove said they would like to see something larger than 13 acres. Bloomington is using 26 acres. Brown asked who would be liable for any damage or injury to participants. He asked if the pet owner would be liable or if the City would be responsible. Hargrove said she would have to defer that question to the City Attorney. Wright said he would like to know what the dog population is in Eden Prairie and if such a park is developed, would there be additional liability costs to the City. Also,he questioned how the waste would be handled. Loose responded that there are 1,720 dog license holders in the City. Hargrove explained that she feels there should be a fee for use policy and could be tied in with the dog license fee. With regard to waste, dog parks are monitored by the users. Waste has not been an issue. PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION August 5, 2002 Page 5 Yasiri said she has no feelings either way with regards to an off-leash dog park. However, she said she was sure the City has limited resources and there is limited park space available. The citizens very clearly stated in the City-wide survey done about two years ago that they want more done with less taxes. The amount of money the proposed park would cost the City is a big consideration. Swanson asked what residents are currently doing in terms of letting their dogs run. Hargrove responded that many use other off-leash dog parks in the area. There are approximately 13 parks in the metro area or attainable area. There are also some people that allow their dogs to run off-leash in the City parks and many allow their dogs to run on Eden Prairie tennis courts. People do take advantage of any space available. Hargrove explained that people would be willing to pay for an off-leash park. Hargrove said the off-leash park is a concept they would like to move forward with. Brown indicated that their proposal will need to include possible sites for the proposed park. Hargrove pointed out that the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) does have desirable open space. A dog park is hard on the land. It will be heavily used and there will be heavy traffic areas. Swanson said the idea of a dog park does appeal to her. When she is out running in the City parks there are dogs that are off-leash and it makes her very nervous. She likes the idea because it does pertain to her safety. Hargrove questioned how they should open negotiations for this park. One of the primary locations that could be used would be MAC property. Yasiri pointed out that at this point looking at sites may be premature. She suggested that they gather as much information as possible on off-leash parks to present to this Commission. This information should include testimony from other municipalities regarding usage cost. Lambert explained that the reason he asked Hargrove to attend this meeting was to let this Commission know what the interest is for a dog park. He indicated that City staff would start looking at various sites to see what options there might be for the park location. Those options would be brought back to this Commission. When the actual petition is received and a formal request for a dog park is made, Lambert stated that it would then be presented to the Commission at their October meeting. Prior to that meeting, City staff will talk to the Airport Commission to see if they would consider allowing the City to use their property for such a park. Lambert explained that the other sites they have in mind are not very big and they may or may not be acceptable to dog owners. They must also be aware that wherever they locate the park they may receive complaints from the surrounding neighbors that they do not want dogs running in their back yards. Hargrove said they would address two major issues at the October meeting; liability and cost. Park location would be a joint venture. V. OLD BUSINESS A. Commission Tour of Park Projects— Thursday,August 8, 2002 PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION August 5, 2002 Page 6 Lambert explained that a tour of park projects for the Commission has been scheduled for Thursday, August 8, at 5:30 p.m. It is anticipated that they will visit five sites, which will give the Commissioners a better understanding of what is going on in the City. B. Contract for Consulting Services on Outdoor Pool Feasibility Study Lambert reported that the Pool Study Committee interviewed three companies that submitted proposals for assisting the City in consulting services. The Committee unanimously recommended Burbach Aquatics LLC to provide consulting services to assist the Committee in completing a feasibility study for a family aquatic center at a cost not to exceed $8,325. This item will be submitted to the City Council for final approval. Lambert stated that the first meeting with the consultant would be held on Monday, September 16, and the Committee will be touring pool facilities on Saturday, August 10. VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. REPORTS OF STAFF A. Director of Parks and Recreation Services 1. Staff Report Summarizing the Result of the 2000 Community Forum and the 2001 City Survey—Input from Community Residents Rmardins! Interests and Priorities for Parks and Leisure Services 2. Eden Prairie Community Survey Report Prepared by Wirthlin Worldwide Lambert explained that the Commission had requested a copy of the Community Forum results and City Survey. This information was included in the Commission's agenda packet. Yasiri asked that the Commission review this material very carefully. The results of this survey are very important in their decision making process. Brown mentioned that an Art Center was referred to in the survey. He questioned whether or not the City and School could work something out to jointly use the new facility at the High School. Lambert responded that City staff has talked to the School District about possibly coordinating events of the City and School for the use of the School facility. The School facility is booked pretty solidly for School events. City staff would like to see more community theater and intergenerational programs using this facility. Yasiri pointed out that there are other resources in the City that could possibly be used. Lambert stated that another concern is the cost of using other facilities. The community does get charged for the use of the School's facility. 3. Staring Lake Park Sliding Hill PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION August 5, 2002 Page 7 Lambert reported that they had only received three bids for the regrading of Staring Lake Park Sliding Hill. The bids were significantly higher than the cost estimates. The Engineer's estimate for the project was $15,385 and the quotes from the three contractors ranged from$20,313 to $29,860. Staff is recommending rejection of these quotes with the intent of re-advertising and bidding the project for the spring of 2003. The primary reason for delaying this work is that currently contractors are extremely busy and backlogged due to the wet spring. Staff estimates that with a winter bid and spring construction timeframe the project cost should be much lower and closer to the Engineer's estimate. Larson suggested that staff look at combining this project with some other project in the City. Since this is a relatively small project they may get a better quote if it is combined. 4. More House Renovation Lambert explained that he has not seen a written report on the renovation of the More House. It is his understanding that the City will be responsible for the restoration of the existing facility and Dunn Brothers will be responsible for the expansion and upgrading to make a restaurant. The City is responsible for bringing the building up to code and it is estimated that this will cost approximately $700,000. The adaptive reuse is a much better deal than the City being responsible for the entire renovation. Over a ten-year lease, the City could possibly recoup $500,000. B. Leisure Education Program Mid-Term Program Evaluation Carla Kress, Adaptive Recreation Coordinator, explained that the Commission did approve this program in February and asked that a mid-year evaluation of the program be presented. Kress explained that the purpose of the program is to provide opportunities for individuals with disabilities to develop and/or improve cognitive, physical, behavioral, social and emotional skills through life-long recreation and leisure interests. Kress stated that they are currently serving 36 participants between the ages of 3 and 23 with developmental disabilities. Parents are very happy with the program. They have commented on the progress their son/daughter is making. They have identified increased social skills when participating in recreation programs; development of new recreation interests along with where and how to access their interests. Most importantly, parents feel this program will definitely have an impact on their son/daughter's future as they become adults as this program is teaching them many skills needed to be a part of their community. Kress further explained that staff has been looking at ways to offset the subsidy level. They have been looking at partnerships with two agencies that will increase more group programs, increase participation numbers and bring in more revenue. They are looking at promotions. They are beginning to tap into other settings/disciplines to promote the program and provide leisure ed programming in those settings such as group homes, schools and boys/girls homes. Kress said staff has identified two foundations in which this program meets their criteria. They are in the process of writing PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION August 5, 2002 Page 8 and submitting grants to those foundations, Bremer and Wal-mart. Yasiri suggested that staff also look at the Annie Casey program for possible grants. Barrett pointed out that in February it was proposed that this program would be fully funded. It appears that the City is subsidizing this program by $14,000. He asked what is different now from what was proposed in February. Kress explained that in February they did discuss wavered services offered by Hennepin County. This program has been going for about a year and there are more and more parents getting on the waiver program. City staff is working with the County to promote this program. They need to get the people using the waiver program into the Leisure Education Program. Lambert explained that they did submit a proposal to this Commission that this program would be on a trial basis and it should not be subsidized. That was their intent. The Leisure Education Program is a program that is not offered by any other city. Lambert pointed out that they are a long way from it being self- supporting. The City is subsidizing it by 67 percent. This is a new program and nothing like it has ever been done before. It is a very difficult program to run without subsidy. This type of program takes a lot of time to make contacts and to develop. For the first few months there was no money coming in. The longer the program is in operation the subsidy should come down. It will still not be 100 percent funded for some time unless they are able to generate some grants to make up the difference. Lambert explained that possibly for the first two or three years there will probably have to be grants to offset the costs for this program. It is anticipated that at the end of the year staff will again come back to the Commission to review the funding of this program. If they are at 85 percent funded they may request that the program run for another year. If they are only at 67 percent funded they may recommend that the program not be continued. Perhaps by the third year the costs will be entirely covered. There is a real need for a program like this. It is a costly program and they are attempting to meet their goal of making this program self-supporting. Yasiri suggested that staff contact Hennepin County to get a listing of people in the area that may be interested in this program. Kress said they will be meeting with social workers and to get information out to the schools. Yasiri said the Commission needs to think about the possibility that this program may not be 100 percent funded. There may be families out there that do not qualify for the waiver program but may be willing to help support the Leisure Education Program. She suggested that City staff query those families to determine if they would be willing to pay additional fees before the program is discontinued. The Commission discussed with City staff various alternatives for getting more participation in the Leisure Education Program. V. Adiournment Obiazor pointed out that the next scheduled Commission meeting is September 2. Since this is Labor Day weekend that meeting will be cancelled. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission is October 7. PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION August 5, 2002 Page 9 Motion: Wright moved, Barrett seconded, to adjourn the meeting The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. The motion carried 7-0.