Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks and Recreation - 04/05/2010 APPROVED MINUTES PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MONDAY,APRIL 5, 2010 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Geri Napuck, Chair; Commissioners: Tom Bierman, Derek Gunderson, Larry Link (arrived at 8:00 p.m.) and Joan Oko COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Hutch Coburn and Lee Elliott-Stoering STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES: Pranay Rao COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT: Jay Lotthammer, Parks and Recreation Director Stu Fox, Parks and Natural Resources Manager Wendy Sevenich, Community Center Manager Bob Lanzi, Recreation Coordinator Nicole Weedman, Recreation Coordinator RECORDING SECRETARY: Carol Pelzel I. ROLL CALL/INTRODUCTIONS The meeting was called to order by Chair Napuck at 7:00 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Napuck asked that a letter to MAC regarding Flying Cloud Fields be added to the agenda. Lotthammer said this could be included under VH. Old Business A. MAC Lease Update. Motion: Oko moved, seconded by Gunderson, to approve the agenda as amended. The motion carried, 4-0. III. APPROVAL OF PRNR MINUTES —March 1, 2010 Motion: Oko moved, Gunderson seconded, to approve the March 1, 2010 Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission meeting minutes as presented. The motion carried, 4-0. IV. REPORT OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION V. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 5, 2010 Page 2 VI. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATION VII. OLD BUSINESS A. MAC LEASE UPDATE/LETTER Lotthammer reported City staff met with MAC to discuss their offer for lease of Flying Cloud fields. All terms of the negotiations for sale or lease are private information until a lease or sale occurs. Once the City has actual terms they will bring this information to this Commission for further consideration and may require a closed meeting. Lotthammer said MAC has presented some figures and terms for the City to review and they have also requested guidance regarding commercial development on that property. The City is interested in a similar or better deal than what was called out in the 2002 Agreement. He stated City staff will be meeting with MAC within the next couple of days to review their proposal. If commercial development occurs on this property, additional costs may be incurred for retaining walls, grading,piping, etc. and those costs will have to be covered by MAC or the commercial developer. Lotthammer said the City is not opposed to giving MAC an opportunity to go through the process of determining if commercial development is viable but are also not interested in going backwards. In response to a question from Napuck, Lotthammer explained the City reoriented MAC's original plan for commercial development that works better for the fields. Initially, MAC had the frontage on Pioneer Trail and in order to do that the plan compromised space between the soccer fields and baseball fields. With the City's proposed orientation, they have a better field layout. MAC seemed to be okay with the new orientation but is checking with their developer. City staff still needs to get back to MAC on the land development related items. Oko expressed concern with the amount of traffic on Mitchell Road especially on a Sunday morning. She questioned the type of development being proposed for this area. Lotthammer said it appears to be a gas station type development. He explained at this point it is only a concept and has not gone through the public process required for commercial development. Staff is suggesting if they develop this as commercial, MAC follow the same process as any other commercial developer would. Napuck questioned if MAC follows the process will that delay the City's ability to negotiate some final agreement and to do what is necessary to get the land into soccer fields. Lotthammer answered they would like to put those items on separate tracks. The City Attorney indicated they could try to do that. The development process would take several months and the City would like to get their site work started as soon as possible. If they waited for the commercial development it could take another year before they could begin the work for the fields. MAC knows how important it is for the City to move forward with the fields and they should be able to find a way to get the development and the lease agreement on different tracks. MAC has been very PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 5, 2010 Page 3 responsive in getting back to the City and staff feels they understand the need to keep moving. Bierman reviewed the letter drafted by him and Oko to MAC regarding the 2002 Final Agreement implementation. He said they tried to express the Commission's concern for MAC's reluctance to implement the Final Agreement in a timely manner. Napuck thanked Bierman and Oko for their work on the letter and feels the information in the letter was clearly researched and well written. She asked if this is something they need to finalize this evening. Lotthammer said he did not think they would have to finalize it this evening. He said he will share with MAC that a letter has been developed by this Commission and express their sentiment of urgency in moving forward with this process. Lotthammer said he would ask City staff to review the numbers included in the letter, fill in dates, etc. Oko said it is also important to tell MAC this is a greatly restrained letter. In response to a question from Gunderson regarding funds available, Lotthammer explained the City has bond referendum funds for this project and until they go out to bid they will not know if they have adequate funding. Their estimate for the 2005 referendum was $1.2 million and they currently have approximately $1.3 million available including interest. Fox explained the original proposal was for two baseball fields and four other multipurpose fields. They have since cut one field because of the Pioneer Trail road expansion. Lotthammer said they propose to bid this project in a way where they can add or deduct items. Depending on how the bids come in they would do add-ins or deducts and even do it in phases if necessary. Napuck said she has a couple points she would like included in the proposed letter. It should be noted that about 75 percent of the Commission members were not on the Commission at the time the Final Agreement was made. Also, most members of the City Council were not on the Council when the original agreement was reached but they are all bound by this agreement just as MAC should be bound by it. The letter should also state that the Commission would like the lease of this property to go forward as a separate matter from the commercial development of the property. Bierman asked if MAC is only open to developing this location for commercial development or would the City have some other property that could be developed. Lotthammer responded the City does not have any other property available or own any that could be traded. Also, Lotthammer said he does not believe there is any other airport property desirable for them to develop as commercial. Oko said she believes there are residents who live across the street from this proposed development that don't want commercial development next to them. There are gas station owners that all belong to bigger organizations and should community members not endorse this location for a gas station other stations in the community may be affected by this. Bierman said there are 25,000 people who are being affected by the inaction of MAC and they may boycott any business located at this site. Also, City PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 5, 2010 Page 4 staff will take more abuse from the residents and they will question how this all came about. Bierman said they need to keep the position in the community that whatever they do; MAC is not getting the entire benefit. Gunderson said since he has been on the Commission he does not feel any better towards MAC. The Commission now has to deal with something that should have been dealt with some time ago. MAC is not following through on an agreement that has been agreed to. He feels they need to get this done so the Commission can move on to other business and to use their time more productively. Oko said this does not only concern the people who use the sports fields but the taxpayers will be very upset when the City is sitting on $1.3 million waiting for MAC to honor their part of the bargain. Gunderson asked what would happen with the money if they do not move forward with this project. Fox said this is something they would have to ask legal counsel about since the bond referendum passed was for Flying Cloud fields. Gunderson suggested they invite a MAC representative to their May or June meeting. Napuck said this would allow Commission members to ask some important questions and it would be on public record. Also, if this delay continues and costs go beyond the funds available from the referendum, MAC should be responsible for those additional costs. Lotthammer said he would request a MAC representative attend a Commission meeting to answer questions from MAC's perspective if this issue is not resolved prior to the Commission's June meeting. Bierman asked what authority this Commission has if they wanted to attend the full MAC Commission meeting. Also,he asked if their letter could be sent to the 16 members of the MAC Board rather than to the staff level. He said he wants to be sure that MAC Board members know that this is a frustrating issue for the City,however, he does not want to step over bounds and get in the way of what City staff is doing. Lotthammer said he is not sure how they can address the MAC Board but he will ask someone on staff. With regard to the letter, staff will make sure the numbers included in the letter are accurate and comments made this evening by the Commission be included in the letter. It will be sent back to this Commission as a draft and once Commission members agree the letter is ready to be sent it will be signed as a Commission. City staff will let MAC staff know this letter exists and it is the Park Commission's desire to send this letter to MAC Board members. Lotthammer said after staff's meeting with MAC on April 13 he will provide the Commission a summary of that meeting. (Larry Link, new Commissioner to the Parks Commission arrived during discussion of this item and introduced himself to the Commission.) B. MILLER PARK PLAYGROUND UPDATE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 5, 2010 Page 5 Fox reported staff is in the process of developing plans and specifications for Miller Park playground improvements. Oko asked if they are still considering using the rotating play equipment discussed at the last meeting. Fox said they have changed the design and did remove that equipment from the plans. VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. OUTDOOR SKATING RINK UPDATE Nicole Weedman, Recreation Coordinator, presented the Commission with an overview of the outdoor skating rinks and sledding hill located at Starring Lake. She explained there are nine warming house locations and the sledding hill is a 700 foot hill. Weedman indicated all utilization numbers are up for the rinks with a total of 19,744 participants for the 2009-2010 season. The total expenses for the rink operating budget was $25,453 and revenue from rentals totaled $459. Oko said for the cost per skater staff does an incredible job of maintaining these rinks. Lotthammer explained when they were looking at budget cuts this was one of the areas they scaled back. The numbers were analyzed and adjustments were made. B. PARKS AND RECREATION ANNUAL REPORT Lotthammer distributed the Parks and Recreation Annual Report explaining this document can also be found on the City's website. As the report indicates, performance was exceptional across the entire department. Napuck said Eden Prairie is a beautiful City well managed with an excellent staff. They did an excellent job even though they had less to work with this year. C. APPOINTMENT TO COMMITTEES Lotthammer explained representatives of this Commission serve on the City and School Facility Use Advisory Committee and the Sports Facilities Committee and the Commission will need to appoint a member to the City/School Committee and two or three members to the Sports Facilities Committee. Lotthammer briefly reviewed the duties of each Committee. Motion: Motion was made by Oko, seconded by Bierman, to appoint Gunderson to the City/School Facility use Advisory Committee from April 6, 2010 to May 31, 2011. The motion carried, 5-0. Motion: Motion was made by Gunderson, seconded by Bierman, to appoint Link, Elliott-S toering, and/or Coburn to the Sports Facilities Committee from April 6, 2010 to May 31, 2011,pending approval. The motion carried, 5-0. PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 5, 2010 Page 6 IX. REPORTS OF STAFF A. COMMUNITY CENTER MANAGER 1. Community Center Catering Modification. Bob Lanzi, Recreation Coordinator, stated staff has established a less-restrictive catering list for the Community Center and presented an overview of this program. He indicated staff is recommending the less-restrictive catering list to expand and enhance food options at a variety of price points and to promote more flexibility for rental groups. Although they have had over 200 rental groups, they only had 27 groups that actually fell into the category to be used by one caterer. Another 20 groups asked to use their own caterers based on ethnic or religious needs. Lanzi stated many of the groups indicated they did not have 30 participants so they were not required to use the Community Center's catering list. This resulted in less revenue for the Community Center but they still had the same clean up and safety concerns for food as those who were paying for a caterer. Staff is now proposing a program that is less restrictive and easier to manage. They are proposing a$40 annual fee for an Eden Prairie caterer and an $80 annual fee for a non-Eden Prairie caterer. There would no longer be a commission fee paid to the Community Center by caterers. Oko asked if they could charge for the clean-up expense. Lanzi responded there could be some sort of user group fee regardless of which caterer they used. Sevenich explained right now they are focusing on the caterers. Step 2 will be to determine what they should charge users. She indicated they will be coming back to the Commission with the second component of this program which will be a user fee. Oko said she feels this proposal is a good idea but questioned why they went to $40 and $80 rather than to $50 and $100. Lanzi said they were most comfortable with the $40/$80 fee especially if the caterer used the facility one or two times. Sevenich said they want to make this an affordable option. Oko said she thinks they should be charging more in the $50/$100 range. A $50 annual fee for Pizza Hut or Subway is minimal. Napuck said she also felt the fee was a little low and agrees a$50/$100 fee would be appropriate. She does not believe this is a lot for an annual fee to give them the ability to be on a catering list. Gunderson asked if the annual fee is per location or vendor. Sevenich said they had not considered that but is something they will look into. Bierman said if a caterer only had one event per year the fee may be rather high. He questioned if they could consider the percentage of sales with a minimum. Lanzi answered this is something staff is trying to get away from because caterers PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 5, 2010 Page 7 were passing the percentage of sales onto the customers by adding a service fee. Sevenich explained an annual fee is a lot easier to collect. Bierman said they could establish this policy and after some time evaluate the program and if staff believes it is working he could easily go along with the proposal. Napuck said her gut feeling is the annual fee should be higher but staff would be the best judge for the amount since they work with this program on a regular basis and if they need to charge less she is okay with that. Lanzi explained staff's main goal is to have a less restrictive list of caterers. Oko said she does have some concern if they were to charge $40 they would need 30 caterers to generate $1,200. Sevenich said she does not see a problem with charging $50/$100 and is sure they will get 30 caterers to sign up. Gunderson asked how many one-time vendors they have and if they feel those vendors will pass the fee onto their customers. Lanzi said he does not believe they will pass the fee on to the customer like they did the percentage commission. Bierman said he feels the word "annual" needs to be clarified. He questioned if it is from January to December or when the first fee for catering is paid. Lanzi explained annual would be January through December. Lotthammer said it would be the calendar year making it simpler to track. As they start the program they will probably pro-rate the fee this year as the program begins in June. Oko recommended they charge $25/$50 for this year starting in June and then $50/$100 beginning next year. Motion: Motion was made by Oko, seconded by Gunderson, to recommend to the City Council to establish a less-restrictive catering list and begin charging an annual catering fee to all caterers who provide catering services at the Eden Prairie Community Center. Annual is defined as January 1 through December 31. All members present voted aye and the motion carried, 5-0. FYI: Annual Ice Show —May 7, 8 and 9 B. RECREATION SERVICES MANAGER FYI: Poetry Night—April 19 FYI: Animal Open House—April 10 C. PARKS AND NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGER 1. Observatory Update Fox reported construction of the observatory building is on hold at this time. This is due to the spring thaw but it is anticipated that work will start again within two weeks. FYI: Park Clean-Up Day—April 17 PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION April 5, 2010 Page 8 FYI: Arbor Day Walk—May 1 D. PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR 1. Parks and Recreation Work Plan Lotthammer presented the 2010-11 Work Plan for the entire department. This plan explains what the Department does on a day-to-day basis. City departments get together twice a year to review the Work Plan. They meet mid-year to show the progress of that work and at the end of the year they review the Department's accomplishments. This report and the Department's annual report shows what has been done and what they plan to do. 2. Visioninlz Update Lotthammer explained at a previous Commission meeting it was suggested that a visioning process would be something that Commission members would be interested in undertaking. He presented a brief overview of timeline and work process that incorporates techniques and strategies for forecasting and visioning. This program would also be of great benefit to staff. Lotthammer asked Commission members to provide him with comments regarding this process and staff will refine the document as they move forward. Bierman challenged Commission members to come up with at least five or seven visioning ideas. 3. 2010 PRNR Work Plan Lotthammer briefly reviewed the Commission's work plan explaining the next meeting will be a joint meeting with the Arts & Culture Commission. Also, the Board and Commission banquet is scheduled for Wednesday, May 12. X. NEXT MEETING The next regular meeting of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission is a joint meeting with the Arts & Culture Commission scheduled for Monday, May 10, 2010 at the Art Center. X. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Gunderson moved, seconded by Bierman, to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.