Loading...
Parks 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.