Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks and Recreation - 05/01/2000 APPROVED MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS & RECREATION CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSION MONDAY, MAY 1, 2000 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Kim Teaver, Chair; Don Jacobson, Vice Chair; Susan Dickman, Ann Birt, David Larson, Paul Sodt COMMISSION STAFF: Robert A. Lambert, Director of Parks and Recreation Services; Laurie A. Obiazor, Manager of Recreation Services; Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources; Lyndell Frey, Community Center Manager; Tria Mann, Arts and Special Events Coordinator; Joel Klute, Ice Arena and Concessions Coordinator RECORDING SECRETARY: Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL Chair Teaver called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. All Commission members were present. Ann Birt left the meeting at about 8:00 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Jacobson moved, seconded by Sodt, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 6-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —April 3, 2000 Dickman made a correction on page 5, in the second paragraph under City Recreation Programs. The first sentence should read "Dickman said she thought the programs had changed quite a lot in recent years." MOTION: Jacobson moved, seconded by Dickman, to approve the minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting held April 3, 2000, as published and amended. Motion carried 6-0. IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. OLD BUSINESS VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Recommendations to the Program Board on the Third Rink Task Force Report Lambert explained that about a year ago, the City received a petition from the Eden Prairie Hockey Association (EPHA), asking the City Council to consider the PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 1, 2000 Page 2 feasibility of a third indoor rink. A decision was postponed because General Growth Corporation had plans, as part of the renovation of the Eden Prairie shopping center, to build an indoor rink. However, that didn't prove to be financially feasible for the company, so the hockey association asked the City Council to consider building a third indoor rink. A task force was put together, with representatives from the EPHA, the Figure Skating Club, an architect, members from the construction industry and other residents of Eden Prairie, to look at all of the issues and answer them before making a recommendation. The Council asked the task force to see if it would be feasible to build a third rink without using City funds. The Parks and Recreation Commission were asked to make a recommendation to the Program Board, and they would make a recommendation to the City Council. The Council will either approve it or not. The Parks and Recreation Commission would not be approving a third rink; it would be approving a process. The co-chairs of the task force, John Schmelzle and Pat Richard, would be explaining how the task force determined whether there is a need for a third rink and if it is feasible to build it. Pat Richard spoke first. He said he was one of the non-skating people on the task force. The diverse backgrounds of the group were exceptional. The challenge was to be as objective as they could and come up with a recommendation all the members could stand behind. They were able to do this in just three meetings. Richard said it was probably the most efficient community group he has served on. People on the task force asked very tough questions. This caused them to look deeper into the numbers and dig deeper for information. People came back with the information requested, even if it didn't support what they were proposing, because they wanted to be as realistic as possible. Richard asked the Parks and Recreation Commission to allow the task force to go forward to the next step. The task force believes there is a need for another rink and that it is financially feasible without using any City money, other than donation of the land. John Schmelzle said he is ice chairman of the hockey association and has children in the hockey association. The task force's first step was to determine if there is a need for a third rink, and it did. The EPHA and Figure Skating Club need 1,200 to 1,500 hours of additional ice time, which they would rent on a third sheet of ice. This is based on the growth rates projected in those groups, especially in girls' hockey, and in the high school hockey league. Rinks are in huge demand during the hockey season. Right now the EPHA rents 1,500 hours of ice time at the Eden Prairie Community Center, and buys an additional 700 to 800 hours from other rinks. Another problem is that because of the difficulty in buying ice, the association has been allocating its teams less ice time than many other communities in the area. The second step for the task force is to determine how they can build it without costing the City or taxpayers any money. Schmelzle showed two drawings of options for locating a third rink attached to the Community Center. The first option has the third rink perpendicular to the other rinks, behind the Community Center. The second option puts the rink toward the front edge of the Community Center, primarily on school property where there is presently a sidewalk. Student traffic could flow through it from the Community Center parking lot. The school is interested in this option. Both options are estimated to cost just under $4 million. PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 1, 2000 Page 3 Sodt asked if the task force had considered how much that amount could be reduced. Schmelzle answered they want to have all the facts before they take a position. They have looked at other rinks in the area that cost less than $2 million. One difference between them and the one proposed for Eden Prairie is the City's requirement for a brick exterior to match the existing building, rather than using concrete panels. Richard replied it will be necessary to go to the next step to get a hard number on the cost. However, the task force believes some things in the project could be modified to bring the cost down. Schmelzle explained one item that could reduce the cost by at least $400,000 is omitting the dry-land training facility, which is used by hockey players to develop certain skills and abilities off-ice, and is less expensive for the association than paying for ice time. It could also be used by the high school. Although the hockey association would like to include a dry-land training area in the proposed facility, they are more interested in getting a third sheet of ice. Two years ago, the hockey association rented space in a warehouse and equipped it to be used for dry-land training. Jacobson observed that this facility would add impervious surface to the whole area and there was no additional NURP pond shown on the drawings. He asked if there was any thought about the addition of a NURP pond or expansion of an existing one. Schmelzle replied no, not yet. Step one of the task force's recommendation would include such an evaluation. The EPHA and Figure Skating Club would pay $20,000 to do soil borings and detailed designs. He asked the Commission to recommend that they be allowed to go ahead to do that. Teaver said she was looking for models that would show potential revenues as well as the cost of getting the facility up and going and to indicate how advertising would be included. She asked if those models would be involved in the second step of the process. Schmelzle replied yes. Step one would be determining the real construction cost; step two would be determining the real operating cost. Regardless of the operating cost, revenues will not pay for it all. There will be a large capital amount that either needs to be debt serviced or bought down. The hockey association would prefer the buy-down option. This could be done in the following ways: (1) Obtaining a "Mighty Ducks" grant of $250,000 (if this program is renewed). The hockey association will put in an application. This amount would be matched by the hockey association. (2) The Figure Skating Club will also put some money in (amount not known). (3) The task force will ask the City Council to consider major corporate sponsorship and advertising in the facility and/or on the outside of the building. Vendor providers are also needed. Larson said he liked the Option 2 plan because it is tied to the high school and allows students to flow through it, possibly getting them more involved. He wondered if this building would have to match the appearance of the high school PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 1, 2000 Page 4 structure. Lambert replied it would not, but would have to match the Community Center because it is an addition to it. However, these are only schematic drawings to show conceptually how it would fit on the site. Lambert said there are many things that would have to work out. Any one of the steps along the way might be called a cut-off point. Approval of the School Board and DNR would be needed, among others. An additional NURP pond would be needed; in fact, the site already has 80 percent more impervious surface than regulations allow. It may even be necessary to go to a different site. However, if this third rink could be added to the present facility, where there is a manager and other staff in place, that would be the most economical way to go. Lambert said the City will try to make it work in this location. The Parks Commission is just being asked at this point to decide whether or not this is a good process. Dickman asked if additional parking was shown on the drawing of the first option. Schmelzle replied that in the first option there is no additional parking. Parking is already a problem at the Community Center. In Option 2 there are 76 additional parking spaces, but in either alternative there should be sufficient parking except when there is a tournament or other major activity going on. Jacobson asked, in the first phase when soil borings are taken, would the DNR approval come into play. Lambert responded that in the first phase they are trying to determine what the construction costs would be, because the cost could be very different, depending on the soils. As part of the same process, they would have to go to the school district to see if school property can be used. They would also look at the City Code regarding NURP pond standards to find out if variances may be needed. Sodt questioned the wisdom of spending even $20,000 until there are good assurances the project is financially feasible. The hockey association may obtain a "Mighty Ducks" grant of $250,000 and would match that amount, and may be able to cut 10 percent out of the projected construction cost, but that amount would still be $1.5 million short. He asked if the task force had any idea where that would come from. Brian Hewitt introduced himself as vice-president of the EPHA. Hewitt said they don't have all the answers at this point, but the association believes it can be done because other communities have done it. Corporate sponsorship would be needed. Schmelzle said the first step in the process is to find out if it is feasible to build on the Community Center site and what it would cost. After that, if Mighty Ducks money of $250,000 is obtained, then they would go after advertising and corporate fund-raising. They could not ask corporations to commit when the task force doesn't know what the total cost will be, where the rink will be located, and the feasibility of that location. Schmelzle added that the task force report didn't include any additional, on-going funding from the EPHA. That money would be debt-free to the City. PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 1, 2000 Page 5 Larson said he is the financial business, and he believes there are companies that will come forward and provide sponsorship of a new rink. There are some other issues, such as whether the City would allow that. Lambert said he believed it would be necessary to come up with $1.5 to $2 million. There may be one or two big sponsors that could be interested. If the City would allow that, it would be a change of policy. However, the City Council asked the task force to find out if constructing a third rink is feasible. Using corporate sponsorship may be the only way to fund this, so the task force should find out up front if the City will support it. The task force expects to get some direction from the City Council and guidance from the Parks Commission and Program Board. Sodt said he isn't negative about building the rink, but he doesn't see in the report where the $1.5 million will come from. Schmelzle replied that point 3 of the recommendation states that after completing the first two steps, the City would have a better idea of how much money would be required to buy down the construction cost. At that point the City would put the project on hold until that amount of money is raised. The task force has looked at other communities to see how they did it. The task force agreed that a rink is needed and how many hours can be sold. The hockey association is willing to match a Mighty Ducks grant for a total of$500,000. If they can raise the money then it will be built. If it can be built at no cost to the City or taxpayers, that is a good deal. Larson said he saw some inflated numbers from the hockey association in the report on the number of hours needed by the hockey players. Also, he wondered if they couldn't go together with Chanhassen to build a new rink. Hewitt replied Chanhassen is partnering with Chaska to build a new rink. Schmelzle explained that the number of hours are derived from three things: growth in the Figure Skating Club; growth in the EPHA, much of which is fueled by girls' hockey; and school enrollment projections, which show enrollment grows, then drops a little and then levels off. Four years ago the hockey association stopped sending out flyers in the fall to the schools, with information about joining, because the association didn't have enough ice time for the players that were already in the association. Schmelzle said he is very comfortable with the numbers in the report. Dickman asked if there are other sports that could take place in this facility that would add to its adaptability. Schmelzle said if the rink were closed down in the summer it could be used for other sports, but the task force concluded that wouldn't be a significant source of revenue. Birt said she liked Option 1 the best, artistically. However, she realized that it also has to be practical. Jacobson questioned the numbers in the report that showed a projected increase of 40 percent in the hours for hockey. Schmelzle replied this was based on the growth in girls' hockey and catching up on the allocation of ice time for each team to bring it even with other communities. If a third sheet is built, the hockey association would be buying ice time at the Community Center instead of at other rinks. PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 1, 2000 Page 6 Jacobson said he understood from the report the hockey association would be increasing the number of hours to 3,296 by 2002. Would they have to buy time at other rinks? Hewitt answered yes, they would still need to rent outside of Eden Prairie. Schmelzle explained that is because it is mostly needed in prime time. Teaver asked where they go to rent ice. Schmelzle replied they have had to buy more of it at worse hours every year. They drive as far as New Prague, Maple Grove and St. Paul. Jacobson asked why they need so much ice time. Schmelzle explained there are district and regional tournaments to compete in. The more time spent on the ice, the more progress there is in development of the skater. Hewitt predicted the hockey association would be going year-around eventually. Jacobson asked if they had looked at new technologies in ice rinks. Hewitt said the association looked at so-called plastic ice. It is still being tested. Sodt asked why the association couldn't carry out a lot of their program on outdoor rinks in the winter. Schmelzle said if the weather would cooperate they would be out there all the time. The ice has only been good for five weeks each winter for the last five winters. The youngest players get allocated to the outdoor rinks the most, and they complain about the condition of the ice. Sodt wanted to know what other types of solutions had they looked at. Richard replied the hockey association has shrunk the growth in their program and has gone to many other rinks in the area to rent ice. They charge the parents more than they used to because of this. He believed they are already doing other alternatives and are trying to find better alternatives. The hockey association pays $140 per hour to rent ice. Now they are asking if they can spend $20,000 to begin the process of building a new facility. If some sponsor can be brought into this process, and if the City Council turns that down, Richard said he would challenge that decision. The task force is requesting that the Parks Commission let them go to the next step and see if they can find the money to go forward. Sodt said he is questioning the wisdom of spending that money, but he is willing to give them that chance. He wondered if it would be feasible to build a freestanding rink primarily for figure skating, open skating, private lessons and ice training for the youngest hockey players. Perhaps it could be built for $1 million or less. Hewitt said they did look at that kind of concept at Miller Park. Lambert said there were a couple of reasons the idea of a freestanding rink was turned down. Financially it wouldn't pay for itself. The City would still have to provide staff there. Cottage Grove decided to build one regulation rink and one studio rink for figure skating and for children to learn on. It still cost the same amount of staff time and they could not get the revenue off that rink. The hockey associations are the real revenue source. MOTION: Dickman moved, seconded by Sodt, to accept the recommendation of the Third Rink Task Force, as put forth by Bob Lambert, and the conditions in steps 1, 2 and 3. PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 1, 2000 Page 7 1ST AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Jacobson asked to amend this to read "to accept the recommendation of the Third Rink Task Force, as put forth by Bob Lambert in a memo, dated March 30, 2000, and the conditions in steps 1, 2 and 3." Dickman accepted the amendment. Motion, as amended, carried 5-0. 2nd AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Sodt moved, seconded by Larson, to add to the original motion "this approval recognizes that advertising and naming revenues are likely to be necessary." 2nd Amendment to the Motion carried 5-0. X. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Jacobson moved, seconded by Larson, to adjourn the meeting. Chair Teaver adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m.