Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary thur December 2002Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda January 23, 2002 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of December Meeting Minutes: 3. Unfinished Business: a) Continue Discussion on the YMCA vs an In -House Administrative Structure. b) Status of Community Survey Plans. c) Discuss potential need for a skate park. d) Discussion of the building inspector's report on the condition of the existing park buildings. 4. New Business: a) 5. Commissioner/Staff Reports 6. Request for future agenda items/other business Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes January 23, 2002 Roll Call: Coughlin, Szczepanski, Silvis, Kroeger, Long, Dazenski, Lee, Roepke Absent: Kahn, Gunn, Pothen, Kunz Meeting Called to order: Coughlin Coughlin stated that he was going to welcome and swear in the new Commission member but he is not present; he will do that at the next Park and Recreation Meeting. Need to nominate a Chairperson and Vice Chairperson for the year 2002. Silvis nominated Coughlin, Szczepanski 2"d the nomination; Commission consented. Coughlin nominatee Szczepanski for Vice Chairperson; Commission consented. Coughlin nominated Tracy Juell as the Official Secretary, Szczepanski 2"d Coughlin stated that some of the Commission members have indicated that the 3`d Wednesday of every month is causing some scheduling conflicts and would like to explore the possibility of changing the date of the meeting. Coughlin will poll Commission members for their date preferences. NOTE: Coughlin polled committee members, Park and Recreation Commission Meetings will take place on the 4th Thursday of every month at 6:30pm. (Next Meeting: February 28, 2002 at 6:30pm, Council Chambers) Approval of the November 28, 2001 minutes: Item 3C, Long is referenced and should be Kroeger Coughlin motioned to approve amended minutes Motioned to approve as amended by Long 2"d by: Silvis Unfinished Business: Item 3a) Continue discussion on the YMCA vs an In -House Administrative Structure. Coughlin stated that Administrator Miller is working with the Finance Director to provide the needed information and she will submit it to the Committee when possible. This item will remain as unfinished business. Item 3b) Status of Community Survey Plans. Coughlin stated that he hasn't received any communication regarding this survey. Coughlin reiterated the purpose of the survey. Kroeger asked if Coughlin has been able to reach Miller; Coughlin has not. This item will remain as unfinished business. Item 3c) Discuss the potential need for a skate park. Coughlin asked Dazenski if he had the opportunity to talk to any other communities. Dazenski replied that he had. Coughlin stated that he contacted a couple of out of state cities that have more of a need for items in house because they don't have surrounding communities that have amenities like that. Two (2) individual stated that the skate parks are covered by present park insurance plans. Dazenski said that they (skate parks) are judged according to "tier level". Tier 1 is 3ft of less and the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) allows coverage with no extra riders. The City of Shoreview is in their 4`" year as a tier 1 skate park that has a quarter pipe, wedge and grind rail implemented in it. Originally the park did not have attendants but they ran into problems with older groups hanging around and rough housing and using improper language; parents were concerned about the younger kids. The attendants the City chose were those kids that were utilizing the park a lot and the situation became better. The City of Shoreview is pleased with the skate park; only a couple of broken wrists by those using the park and the City has had no lawsuits. Maintenance issues are minimal and it is also left out year round; like playground equipment, it must be inspected. Shoreview built theirs 4 years ago and it is made out of wood, the cost was approximately $50,000.00. (80xl50ft) Dazenski also stated that the City of Roseville has a Tier 2 skate park. The course has jumps and those utilizing it must wear protective equipment. Dazenski noted that when the exercise equipment was setup, LMC came out and told us what we needed to do to comply with the insurance company and safety issues. Dazenski believes we should do the same for this project. Tier 2 does require extra insurance and Dazenski noted that both Shoreview and Roseville skate parks are fenced. Roepke remarked that 2 students approached him last week, asking if Mounds View was going to have a skate park. Dazenski stated that skate park be built in a highly visible area; the Community Center or behind the Police Station. Coughlin thanked Dazenski. Kroeger asked how big the skate parks were. Dazenski replied that Shoreview is 80-x15011, Roseville's square footage is 110,000. Roepke stated that Roseville, when under construction, had the kids in the Community come in and paint the ramps and railways and this saved on the cost to have it professionally painted. Coughlin asked Dazenski if either City charges for useage of the park. Dazenski said that Roseville charges $7.00/day and Shoreview charges $2.00/day. Szczepanski asked if a kid could buy a summer pass for it. Dazenski said yes they do, but experienced problems with loss of passes so the Cities went to wrist bands. Coughlin asked for thoughts from the Commission. Kroeger stated its something to look into and asked if any money was budgeted for this. (No) What's the next step? Coughlin said that the Commission should make a recommendation to the Council for the Commission's desire for a skate park and if grants come forward or with the state bonding bill coming up, there might be opportunities to get outside funding. Kroeger asked if it would in our best interest to see how Roseville administers and controls the area. He recommends that everyone in the Commission check it out and observe. Szczepanski asked if we should go ahead and recommend something. Kroeger suggested that we look for location options. Coughlin stated that the Commission should take action to inform the City Administrator of our intent to pursue without a full recommendation perse, recognizing that the Commission will be forthcoming with a recommendation. This will make her aware of our intent in case there are available funds that can be tapped into and expedite the project. Coughlin made the motion to inform the City Administrator of the Commissions intent to pursue further research on a skate park and move forward with it in time. And to also go on site and visit the parks. 2nd by Kroeger Motion unanimously passed. Item 3d) Discussion of the building inspector's report on the condition of the existing park buildings. Dazenski stated that he has had no feed back at all from the building inspector. Coughlin noted that Dazenski had said earlier that the Parks Department had given the buildings an overview. Dazenski replied that yes they have done some obvious repairs. Kroeger asked if it was still desirable to have the building inspector review the buildings. Coughlin stated that he thought it would be a good idea on annual basis. Kroeger thought this would be good information for the Park and Recreation Commission in justifying making future recommendations to the Council. Coughlin said he would recommend to have the annual checks done in the spring. Dazenski stated that Groveland Park is becoming bad and needs major repairs; you just can't put siding on the building to make it nice, it has many more problems. Coughlin asked Dazenski to coordinate a spring time assessment of the buildings. Lee asked if the playground equipment, parking lots and lighting should be assessed at the same time. Coughlin stated by insurance standards the equipment must be annually inspected. He agreed that it would be beneficial to take inventory of the areas regarding the other issues. Szczepanski thought a comprehensive report would be beneficial. Kroeger that the Commission members should tour the facilities and get a first hand assessment of them. Szczepanski suggested the May meeting would be a good time. This item will remain as unfinished business. New Business: No New Items Commission Reports: Dazenski inquired if the new Hillview Shelter should have an opening ceremony (after the carpets are taken out). Roepke suggested putting an announcement in the newsletter. Coughlin suggested that cookies could be served and that the Mayor could cut the ribbon. We could have the ceremony at the same time the buildings are toured by the Commission. He stated that this should be carried over to the next meeting as unfinished business. Szczepanski asked how we can get new tarps for Greenfield Park? Dazenski stated that there is money budgeted for tarps this year. And to avoid damages to the tarps, they should be locked up. Discuss further as new business at the next meeting. (Possibility of Secure Ballfields) Meeting Adjourned: Motioned: Silvis 2"a by: Szczepanski Motion unanimously passed. The next meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission will be on February 28, 2002, 6:30pm. Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda February 28, 2002 Roll Call/Swearing in of Jerry Kunz as Commission Member 2. Approval of January Meeting Minutes: 3. Unfinished Business: a) Continue Discussion on the YMCA vs an In -House Administrative Structure. b) Status of Community Survey Plans. c) Discuss potential need for a skate park. d) Discussion of the building inspector's report on the condition of the existing park buildings. e) Hillview Opening Ceremony/Commission Inspection of the Parks f) Possibility of Securing the Ballfields* *October 24, 2001 meeting "Kroeger stated that in the unfinished business of May 23, 2001 discussion occurred regarding the scheduling of the Greenfield Park field. Roepke stated that this would be taken care of by the YMCA. Also the maintenance of Edgewood field was discussed; it was determined that those using the field would maintain them but how to get the word out. Coughlin stated that this item would be more appropriate for February 2002 as Unfinished Business and will be addressed then." 4. New Business: a) Commissioner/Staff Reports 6. Request for future agenda items/other business Ei RW a v a� s� O 0 a a a� a .o 0 W 3 es vro ti Ei RW Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2002 Roll Call: Coughlin, Szczepanski, Silvis, Kroeger, Long, Dazenski, Lee, Roepke, Pothen, Kunz, Gunn Absent: Kahn Meeting Called to order: Coughlin Approval of the January 23, 2002 minutes: Silvis 2"d the approval of the November 28, 2001 meeting minutes Item 3C,'/4" pipe should be quarter Item 3C, "Coughlin asked for thought from the commission". Thought should be thoughts. Coughlin motioned to approve amended minutes Motioned to approve as amended by Long 2"d by: Szczepanski NOTE: The Park and Rec Commission Meeting was not televised, only audio was received. Recommend to the city Council that the Greenfield Park baseball field be secured and to set the deposit for keys to the field at the standard $50.00. Motioned: Szczepanski 2"a by: Silvis Motion unanimously passed. Direct YMCA/City Staff to contact Edgewood School and/or the school district, requesting that they perform the maintenance on the upper baseball field(s). (Add dirt) Motioned: Pothen 2"d by: Szczepanski Motion unanimously passed. Make permanent the meeting date change to the 4th Thursday of each month. Motioned: Silvis 2"d by: Kroeger Motion unanimously passed. Meeting Adjourned: Motioned: Silvis 2"d by: Kroeger Motion unanimously passed. The next meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission will be on March 28, 2002 at 6:30pm Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda March 28, 2002 Roll Call 2. Approval of February Meeting Minutes: Unfinished Business: a) YMCA security policy b) Greenfield Park — Securing the ballfield C) Community Survey d) Overview of Hillview Park Shelter Grand Opening/City wide park tours scheduled for May. e) Edgewood Infield Maintenance (lime and black dirt) 4. New Business: a) Commission Bylaws. Commissioner/Staff Reports 6. Request for future agenda items/other business I a� J a> O 0 a a b .o O I Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda April 25, 2002 Commissioner/Staff Reports a) Introduction of Water into Spring Lake Update ➢ This was presented to City Council at the April 1, 2002 Work Session ➢ Council requested that the residents around Spring Lake to form an official lake association. ➢ A Joint Powers Agreement will need to be executed between the three surrounding Cities (Mounds View, Spring Lake Park, and Fridley) and Board of Water Commissioners of the City of St. Paul. ➢ The City is waiting to receive a draft copy of the Joint Powers Agreement. Upon receipt it will be placed on the next Council meeting agenda. b) County Road 10 Reconstruction and Revitalization Plan ➢ A Public Information Meeting was held April 24, 2002 ➢ This plan includes landscaping and pathway corridors on both the north and south sides. ➢ Staff is looking for input regarding this plan and recommends that the Park and Recreation Commission review it and provide comments. ➢ A second Public Information Meeting will be held June 17, 2002 at 6:00 p.m. at the Community Center. ➢ This item needs to be added to the June 27th Parks and Recreation meeting agenda. c) Skate Park Seminar Update ➢ The Public Works Director and Parks Forman attended a Skate Park Seminar on March 20, 2002. ➢ It was put on by a vendor so it had a sales pitch, however, it was very informative. ➢ Modular System: move and rearrange ➢ Involve the users in the planning process (fosters pride and ownership) Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda June 27, 2002 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of February Meeting Minutes: Recent Meeting Summary: March 28th Meeting—This meeting was cancelled. April 25th Meeting - There wasn't a quorum to conduct it. May 23`d Meeting - HillView Grand Opening. This was not an official meeting. 3. Unfinished Business: a) YMCA security policy b) Greenfield Park— Securing the ballfield c) Community Survey d) Edgewood Infield Maintenance (lime and black dirt) 4. New Business: a) Commission Bylaws. b) Neighborhood Park Review - Discuss the tour conducted on May 23`d - Review notes and discuss suggested improvements c) Skate Park Project - Discuss the concept of a Skate Park in Mounds View - A Skate Park vendor will be on hand for a presentation - Funding and location (Groveland Park Tennis Courts) - Neighborhood Input d) County Road 10 Reconstruction and Revitalization Plan - Parks Commission to provide comments - Plans area available for viewing at City Hall and on the City's web site e) Mermaid Trail and Walgreen's Trail Issues - Update f) City wide Survey - Is there in interest - If so, what questions should be asked (what input are we looking for) g) Vandalism and Trash in City Parks - What can be done? 5. Commissioner/Staff Reports a) Introduction of Water into Spring Lake Update b) County Road 10 Reconstruction and Revitalization Plan c) Skate Park Seminar Update 6. Request for future agenda items/other business Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes February 28, 2002 Roll Call: Coughlin, Szczepanski, Silvis, Kroeger, Long, Dazenski, Lee, Roepke, Pothen, Kunz, Gunn • Absent: Kahn Meeting Called to order: Coughlin Approval of the January 23, 2002 minutes: Silvis 2"d the approval of the November 28, 2001 meeting minutes Item 3C, 1/4" pipe should be quarter Item 3C, "Coughlin asked for thought from the commission". Thought should be thoughts. Coughlin motioned to approve amended minutes Motioned to approve as amended by Long 2"d by: Szczepanski NOTE: The Park and Rec Commission Meeting was not televised, only audio was received. Recommend to the city Council that the Greenfield Park baseball field be secured and to set the deposit for keys to the field at the standard $50.00. Motioned: Szczepanski 2"d by: Silvis Motion unanimously passed. Direct YMCA/City Staff to contact Edgewood School and/or the school district, requesting that they perform the maintenance on the upper baseball field(s). (Add dirt) Motioned: Pothen 2"d by: Szczepanski Motion unanimously passed. Make permanent the meeting date change to the 4th Thursday of each month. Motioned: Silvis 2"d by: Kroeger Motion unanimously passed. Meeting Adjourned: Motioned: Silvis 2"d by: Kroeger Motion unanimously passed. The next meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission will be on March 28, 2002 at 6:30pm May 23,2002 Neighborhood Park Review Notes Greenfield Park- Have the new traps been ordered? The height of the fence needs to be increased—especially in right field. Groveland Park- Potential location for a skate park. The building needs to be replaced. This should be added to a parks equipment/building replacement program when it is developed. Woodcrest Park- What should the City do with this park? Possibly get a Boy Scout Troop involved. Knollwood Park- Most of the commissioners were unaware of this park. What if anything should be done with it? A pathway was discussed. However, the property does not continue north to Woodale Drive. A pathway easement would be required to construct a pathway that connects Woodale Drive and County Road H. Park and Recreation Committee Meeting June 27, 2002 Commissioner/Staff Reports a) Introduction of Water into Spring Lake Update This was presented to City Council at the April 1, 2002 Work Session ➢ Council requested that the residents around Spring Lake to form an official lake association. ➢ A Joint Powers Agreement will need to be executed between the three surrounding Cities (Mounds View, Spring Lake Park, and Fridley) and Board of Water Commissioners of the City of St. Paul. ➢ The City is waiting to receive a draft copy of the Joint Powers Agreement. Upon receipt it will be placed on the next Council meeting agenda. b) County Road 10 Reconstruction and Revitalization Plan A Public Information Meeting was held April 24, 2002 ➢ This plan includes landscaping and pathway corridors on both the north and south sides. ➢ Staff is looking for input regarding this plan and recommends that the Park and Recreation Commission review it and provide comments. ➢ A second Public Information Meeting will be held June 17, 2002 at 6:00 p.m. at the Community Center. ➢ This item needs to be added to the June 27th Parks and Recreation meeting agenda. c) Skate Park Seminar Update ➢ The Public Works Director and Parks Forman attended a Skate Park Seminar on March 20, 2002. ➢ It was put on by a vendor so it had a sales pitch, however, it was very informative. ➢ Modular System: move and rearrange ➢ Involve the users in the planning process (fosters pride and ownership) Item No. Staff Report No. Meeting Date: January 2, 2001 Type of Business: W.K. WK: Work Session;~PH.:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: Discussion Regarding Park Survey and Comprehensive Plan Date of Report: Jw=002 A topic of discussion at past Park and Recreation Commission meetings has been the need for a Comprehensive Park Plan. Staff has been preparing the long-term capital improvement plan in much the same manner each year. Typically playground equipment has been upgraded as funds will allow and somewhere in the neighborhood of every seven to ten years. Questions leading up to this discussion has been, "Are we doing what the Community wants". Staff is aware of the immediate Park Infrastructure replacement needs and some future plans, such as paving of area walking paths, but again, are we fulfilling the needs and desires of the community. Two things that would help answer these questions and provide direction, establish priorities, and identify possible funding sources would be to: A. Hire a consultant to do a Comprehensive Park Plan which would identify the current condition and amenities of the parks, establish useful life of equipment and formulate a future plan of what would be the best use for the park, in terms of activities in the park. B. Conduct a formalized public survey of the community to determine what the needs and desires are for the parks, both now through several future years. Staff does not have any cost estimates for conducting either of these projects at this time. Perhaps a larger survey could be conducted to receive additional information on other City Services. The Park and Recreation Commission fully supports this recommendation and has directed staff to present these issues to the City Council. Staff seeks Council direction in this matter. Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works C:Nikes documents\staff reports\Parks\Park Comp Plan Survey.doc CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW WORK SESSION AGENDA Tuesday, January 2, 2001 Immediately following the Annual Council Business Meeting Items Discussed Per Consensus 1. Review and Discussion Regarding Street Projects 2001-1, -2 Michael Ulrich 2. Discussion Regarding Park Survey and Comprehensive Plan — Michael Ulrich 3. Schedule Retreat — Kathleen Miller (COUNCIL MEMBERS PLEASE BRING YOUR CALENDARS) 4. Discussion of Council Procedures — Kathleen Miller 5. Discussion of the Golf Course Advisory Committee Membership - Kathleen Miller 6. Discussion of 2001 Appreciation Event for Mounds View Boards and Commissions \\Ntserver\MasterFiles\2001\CityCouncil\Work Session Agendas\01-02-01 W.S.doe Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda July 25, 2002 Roll Call 2. Approval of June 27th Meeting Minutes: Minutes are not available due to technical difficulties in recording the June 27th meeting. 3. Unfinished Business: a) Greenfield Park — letter to ballfield users (rules of use and request for financial contributions) b) Community Survey (see attachments) 4. New Business: a) Commission Bylaws. (see attachment) b) Park Dedication Fund Update (see attachment) C) Skate Park Project - Discuss the concept of a Skate Park in Mounds View - Discuss July 18th Skate Park Field Trip - Funding - Location (Groveland Park Tennis Courts, other locations...) - Neighborhood Input - What are the next steps d) Other New Business 5. Commissioner/Staff Reports County Road 10 Reconstruction and Revitalization Plan 6. Request for future agenda items/other business Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes July 25, 2002 Roll Call: Absent: Coughlin, Szczepanski, Pothen, Dazenski Meeting Called to order: Gunn Approval of the June 2002 minutes: Lee noted that there were no minutes due to televising troubles at the last meeting and it was not televised. Unfinished Business: Greenfield Park Registration Fee Letter Roepke reported that a letter has been drafted explaining to the users of the field at Greenfield Park, that due to maintenance and replacement costs of equipment, a fee will now be required to help off set the costs. There are 3 main users of this field and they are the: BabeRuth's, TriCity Legion and North Suburban Baseball. The City of Vadnais Heights charges $6 per field for each registered team; this draft letter from Mounds View states $7. Should the committee want to implement this for the 2003 season, the Commission would need to approach the Council with this proposal. Gunn asked if Silverview was charged? Roepke stated that the field is used by an Adult Softball League almost on a nightly basis and that a fee is incorporated into the League Fee but nothing is charged for practice time; this applies to the CH field also. Should it be changed to charge for practice time also? Gunn asked if fees are collected, where would they go? Separate fund? Lee stated that an account could be setup and that we can make that language part of the proposal that is presented to Council; a dedicated fund to maintaining Greenfield Park field. Recommend to Council to charge a maintenance fee to the registered teams of Greenfield Park starting in the 2003 season, with a dedicated fund established. Motioned: 2nd by: Motion unanimously passed Discussion: Kroeger asked that the letter be cleaned up. Roepke stated he would. Roepke mentioned that New Brighton and Roseville will soon be requiring a rental fee for their fields. Kroeger asked if teams that use a field would be willing to make donations? Gunn replied that yes that can happen but then things start getting more complicated and a flat fee would be easier to keep track of. Roepke inquired as to how much to charge? Commission decided that $5 would be a sufficient fee and that Roepke should change the letter reflecting new amount. �}d 1/ bl 5 fri (' V, CV ��OX Community Survey Lee stated that attached to the Agenda was a copy of the staff report presented to the Council on January 2, 2001. Lee also stated that staff reviewed video of the meeting and it was determined by the Council that the Commissions could create approximately 10 questions each and submit them to the Council along with reasoning behind each question. Kroeger asked if it was up to the Park and Recreation Commission to devise questions or hire an outside consultant? Gunn said that per the staff report it states to hire a consultant to devise a comprehensive park plan or to conduct a formal survey by a consultant. Roepke asked if a survey could be put in the Mounds View Matters. Kroeger stated that you do not receive any responses, the best approach used in the past was done by telephone. Gunn agreed. Kroeger asked if a professional organization could facilitate the survey? Gunn stated that the Commission could come up with 10 questions first and propose them to the Council. Dedicate a full meeting to questions? Commission members to brainstorm on questions and talk to their neighbors. The next meeting will be dedicated to reviewing proposed questions. Motioned: 2nd; New Business Bylaws of the Park and Recreation Commission Lee stated that these bylaws were taken from the Mounds View City Code. Gunn read each one aloud and the following recommendations were made: 3. "or" should be "and" in the sentence "outside of commission". 6. This should be restated to reflect "current" budget process. Lee stated that he can certainly involve the Park Commission on capital purchases and reinstitute this policy. Commission agreed that they would like to get back involved. 9. Structures apply to Lakeside Park. Amusement Hall should be Community Center. Should also include maintaining and construction. 10. Commission would like to definitely participate and meet with other Commissions to determine if Parks, Trails etc would be affected by a project. Lee will talk with the Community Development Director and ask that the Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda be forwarded to the Park and Recreation Commission. Commission then could determine if their input is necessary. Commission also stated that there are some miss numberings in the bylaws and they should be corrected. Lee to investigate procedure on how to implement changes suggested.by the Commission. Recommend to present these changes to Council and ask for the appropriate protocol in implementing them and for Council to review and approve changes with the understanding of replacing the existing bylaws in the Municipal Code. Motion by: Gunn 2nd; Discussion: None Motion unanimously passed Park Dedication Update Lee stated that the summary was attached to the agenda. Estimated annual revenue is $50,000 but that can change year to year. He will obtain expenditures of the Park Dedication fund for the years 2000 and 2001. Gunn stated that the Park and Recreation Commission can spend or delegate Park Dedication Funds if under $5,000.Lee will also obtain where or whom the dedication funds came from. Gunn asked what the ratio is as far as Park Dedication fees go. Lee will find out. Kroeger stated that the intent for Park Dedication is for the City to live off its interest. Gunn stated that that is the original intent but also realizing that there will be times that the money will have to pooled and wait x amount of years before an improvement can be done. Lee stated that he will get the information together regarding comments about capital improvements. He also stated that it maybe a good idea to invite the Finance Director to a meeting. Skate Park Project Gunn said that those members of the Commission that went on the tour, got to see different type of equipment and materials used at various skate parks. Kroeger took pictures and they are on a CD. He will forward to Lee to distribute to Commission members. He also stated that the parks he visited seemed to be well controlled. Gunn said that they all seemed to be in good shape. Kroeger Commission needs to consider the maintenance of the skate park. Wooden (which was well liked by the kids), pretty easy to maintain, Metal would involve constant painting. Gunn stated that she would like more information from Ramp Rider, the price listing etc. New Brighton has True Rider and they installed the wooden type of skate parks; but of course wood is more expensive. Lee stated that compost material is the new wave type. Gunn showed a group of kids the "Skate Way" plans and they rearranged a few things and liked the design that cost approximately $50,000. May be we can enlist the help of parents to put it together? Kids want the skate park and so do the parents. Where should it be built? Lee said that some of our parks already have the infrastructure required. Kroeger stated that skate parks they toured were not located around residential areas; they were away from people. Gunn said that our parks were the only places we can choose from. Lee suggested that it go behind the Community Center on the backside of the parking lot. Gunn asked what about Greenfield Park? No one seems to use the tennis courts, but it is closer to houses. Kroeger suggested that we could ask that question in the survey. Gunn asked does the Commission want to wait that long because the survey won't go out that quickly. The tennis courts are not used that often and it would be feasible to cut back on a tennis court. Kroeger stated that if the skate park fades in the future, we can turn it back into a tennis court. Gunn thought that Groveland would be the best location. Good visibility. Houses are there but across the street. Lee stated that the Public Works Department is randomly checking the usage of the tennis courts. He also suggested that we could use one of the tennis courts on a 1 year trail basis for the skate park. That way the City won't be spending money on infrastructure and because it's not permanent, the equipment can be moved. Kroeger stated that most courses are concrete or asphalt. 1 tennis court would be considered a mid-sized skate park (comparing to what they saw on the tour) and it would be a good minimum approach. Need to get the input of the surrounding residents that would be affected by the skate park. Lee said he met with 3 out of the 4 property owners. 1 owner was not happy about the idea because they utilized the tennis courts. 2"a owner said he didn't think it was a problem. 3rd property owner thought it was a great idea. Gunn stated that the Commission will need to make a decision on what area we want to dedicate as a skate park and then proceed to talk with the affected property owners. Kroeger said that the Groveland site has pad, fencing and is highly visible. Community Center area will cost more because of the needed pad and fencing but it is located well. Lee suggested listing the 3 proposed sites along with pro's/con's of each. Kroeger also suggested SilverView Park. Gunn said that SilverView has no visibility. Could also utilize Hillview Park for a skate park in the summer and dismantle in the winter. Gunn how long does the Commission want to stretch this out? Must be part of budget process for 2003. Suggest $55,000 in case we have to do some paving and fencing work. Kroeger suggested listing pro's/con's of the 5 sites (Groveland, Greenfield, Community Center, SilverView, Hillview) and email them to Lee by the week of August 5. Also can add the survey questions. Lee will put this recommendation in for the 2003 budget and the Commission can continue with research on the skate park. Gunn said to email Lee by August 8, 2002 your pro's/con's of each of the proposed skate park sites and list your survey questions. No official motion was made, nor 2°d. New Business Kroeger asked if there was anything new regarding Spring Lake? Lee stated that he hasn't heard anything for the past 3 mos. Kroeger asked if it would be possible to put the pictures of the skate parks toured on the City's web site? Lee will talk to Ericson. The next meeting will be August 22, 2002 at 6:30pm. This meeting will be dedicated to the community survey questions. Gunn motioned to adjourn. 2„ d: Motion unanimously passed 4 3. Q Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda August 22, 2002 Roll Call Approval of July 25th Meeting Minutes: Unfinished Business: a) Greenfield Park — letter to ballfield users (rules of use and request for financial contributions) b) Community Survey C) Commission Bylaws d) Park Dedication Fund Update e) Skate Park Project -Location - Neighborhood Input - What are the next steps New Business: a) Any New Business? Commissioner/Staff Reports 6. Request for future agenda items/other business Possible Items for September 26th Agenda • Park Dedication Fund Review (Finance Director will be on hand to answer questions) • Skate Park Discussion Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda September 26, 2002 Roll Call 2. Approval of July 25th Meeting Minutes: 3. Unfinished Business: a) Park Dedication Fund Update (Finance Director will be on hand to answer questions) b) Greenfield Park — letter to ballfield users (rules of use and request for financial contributions) C) Community Survey d) Skate Park Project -Location -Neighborhood Input -Design elements: company and equipment to recommend - What are the next steps 4. New Business: a) Assign a new chairperson b) Any other new business? Commissioner/Staff Reports 6. Request for future agenda items/other business Possible Items for October 24th Agenda • Skate Park Discussion Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes September 26, 2002 Meeting Called to order: Szczepanski Roll Call: Szczepanski, Kunz, Long, Kroeger, Lee, Silvas, Gunn Special Guest: Charlie Hansen, Finance Director Absent: Kahn, Dazenski, Roepke Approval of the July 2002 minutes: Motioned: Silvas 2"d: Long Unfinished Business: Park Dedication Fund Hansen updated the committee with information (December, 2001) as to how much money was presently in the park dedication fund. ($402,000.00) Hansen mentioned that Greg Lee and himself are working on the long range capital improvement program. Szczepanski stated 2 years ago there was $110,000 in the fund and was surprised to see the increase. Gunn stated that the Mermaid and Business Park projects were 2 big contributions to the fund. Hansen did state that $50,000 came of the park dedication fund in 2002 for the Hillview Park construction project. Gunn asked if Charlie could please explain where the park dedication funds come from. Hansen replied that basically when a property is developed or re -developed, the theory is that this now creates an increase of services from the City, one being the Parks, a park dedication fee is then paid. Kroeger stated that there was discussion regarding adding walkways on Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road at the approximate cost of $300,000. Lee concurred that the cost is estimated at $300,000 and the walkway would be constructed from Edgewood Drive to the western City limits. Kroeger asked where would the funds come from. Hansen stated that only the I" phase of the Highway 10 project has been approved and some monies will come out of the special project fund. Lee also said that the segment from Old Highway 8 to Edgewood Drive has been approved to come from the special project fund, but it is quite possible money will come from Ramsey County (cost reimbursed by them). Gunn asked if that's the same for Highway 10, where's the money coming from. Lee stated that Ramsey County's policy is that pedestrian corridor's must be paid by the city its in even though technically the corridor is in the Ramsey County ROW. Hansen stated that the Highway 10 project is a multi-million dollar project and it is contingent on obtaining funds from County, State, and the Federal Gov't. Some monies will still need to be funded by the city; all will not be paid for by grant monies. Guam was glad that the city is looking into grant monies. There is a lot out there for trailway's. Committee thanked Charlie for attending the meeting and answering their questions. Greenfield Park Lee stated that Shannon Roepke drafted the letter that included the minor changes requested by the commission. Kroeger stated that the letter has been sent. Any feed back? Lee said no. Community Survey Lee asked if the commissioner's had come up with 10 questions. Kroeger had composed questions earlier and they were reviewed along with questions from a previous survey from 7-8 years ago. Parks to be addressed: Aidan, Greenfield, Lambert, Oakwood, Silver View, Hillview, Lakeside, Woodcrest, City Hall, Groveland Demographics of Household Survey Questions: 1. How often during the year do you use the Mounds View Parks? Please specify: Summer Winter Spring Fall All of the Above 2. How do you get to the Park(s)? Walk Drive Bike All of the Above How close are you to a Park(s)? (Please specify the Park(s) also)_ 3. Why do you use the Park(s)? Walking Biking Child Summer Activities/Playground Family Organization Recreation Sports Other 4. In General, what do think of the availability and condition of the Mounds View Park and Recreation features: Identification/Signage Walking and Bike Paths Buildings Playground Equipment Picnic Areas Trees Fields (Softball, Soccer, Baseball) Rinks (Hockey and Pleasure) Open Space Nature Study How would you rate its features and condition? What other features would you like to see occur? 5. A. Which Park is closest to your residence? B. Would you support a bond issue item for the development of items within the Park(s). 6. Do you want a Golf Course in Mounds View? 7. How would you rate the following: Surface Play Areas (Football, Soccer, Baseball, Softball, Open Play Fields) Lighted yes or no Marked Nature Trails Hiking/Walking Trails F Bike Trails Cross Country Skiiing Sleding Golf Course Handball Basketball Volley Ball Shuffle Board Horseshoe Pits Playground Equipment Picnic Areas Shelter Buildings Hockey Rinks Pleasure Rinks Ampi-theater Skateboard Park Lawn Bowling Swimming Pool Kroeger asked how does the commission get this survey out? Silvis suggested mailing it with the water bills. Szczepanski asked what do we do with the information when it is received? Should the Park and Recreation Commission do this alone or with other departments. Lee said that it can be proposed to the Council to include other departments or a stand alone survey. Szczepanski asked who should do the survey? Professional or in- house? What's our direction. Kroeger stated that all the residents should receive this survey. Gunn asked if the Community Center usage should be included in the survey? Committee agreed it should. Question 8: What do you use the Community Center for? Exercise Equipment Banquet Center Gym Kroeger and Lee to get together and compile questions, email to all of the committee members for reviewal. Lee will then bring to Council. Motion: Szczepanski 2"a: Gunn Motion unanimously passed. Kroeger asked how this will be managed. Want to get this survey to all of the residents. Mailing? Telephone (random)? Szczepanski suggested that in order to get the most out of the survey, a professional service should be used. Gunn asked if it would be funded out of the park dedication fund. Szczepanski thought it was a good question and this could be worked out at the next level. Skate Park Proiect Lee reiterated from the last meeting that there were 5-6 locations that were discussed for the skate park. Commissioners were to list pro's and con's of each location and come to the meeting with this information. Szczepanski said to refer to the handout in the packet. w How about the location between City Hall and Water Tower? Lee suggested trying it out at Groveland or Greenfield Park. No permanent structure alterations would be needed. We can see how it works; is it successful or if there problems with the neighbors, vandalism, etc. Long asked if it would be a possible to construct another hockey rials; would it be a problem maintaining it? Lee replied that it wouldn't be a problem, but the money will need to come out of the park dedication fund. Guml asked if it's necessary to spend that amount of money. Lee said by using the Groveland or Greenfield site, a trial run can be made without spending a lot of money. Kroeger stated that there are a lot of places with good facilities but they are being used and are close to the neighbors. Lee suggested narrowing the sites to 1 or 2 and then have a neighborhood meeting. Kroeger asked what the criteria should be for narrowing it down? Gunn stated cost. Kroger suggested Hillview and Groveland, both are highly visible. Greenfield is right on the property lines (tennis courts) and this may be too close to the neighbors. Gunn thought Groveland or Greenfield sites would be the best due to the existing surfaces. Lee stated that the recommendation to the Council should include that the Park and Recreation Commission will evaluate the site in the fall of 2003 with local residential input included. Szczepanski suggested having the Police Department patrol the area more. Let's take a vote from all of the commissioners on which park site to use for the skate park: Gunn Groveland Silvis Groveland Krueger Hillview Long Groveland Kunz Hillview Szczepanski Groveland Direct Staff to hold a neighborhood meeting regarding Groveland Park as a trial area for a skate park (loss of 1 tennis court, noise levels); also have available samples of types of skate parks available. Then recommend to Council the area, costs and equipment that's necessary. Motioned: Kroeger 2"d: Gunn Discussion: Before the end of November 2002 and the committee members should make every attempt to attend the neighborhood meeting. Motion unanimously passed. New Business Lee stated that on September 3, 2002, the Council discussed changing the ordinance for the amount of the commissioners needed on the Park and Recreation and Planning Commissions (respectfully), from 9 members to 7. Gunn nominated Kroeger for Chairperson. Szczepanski closed the nominations and asked for a vote from the commissioners: Kroeger Szczepanski Long Szczepanski Kunz Szczepanski Gunn Kroeger Silvis Krueger C Szczepanski Abstained Szczepanski nominated as Chairperson. Szczepanski nominated Kroeger as Vice Chairperson. All commissioners were in favor. (Kroeger abstained) Motion unanimously passed. Commissioner Reports Gunn asked that everyone attend the March of Knights at the Irondale High School on Saturday. Szczepanski would like to discuss whether the YMCA could add 2 trips for the winter activities. (Snowboard and Skiing) The next Parks and Recreation Meeting will be on October 24, 2002. Silvis motioned to adjourn. 2id` Szczepanski Motion unanimously passed. Respectfully Submitted: Tracy Juell Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda October 24, 2002 Roll Call 2. Approval of September 26th Meeting Minutes: 3. Unfinished Business: a) Community Survey • Draft questions in the Sept 26th minutes • Included in 2003 Draft Budget - $7,500 • Council Work Session— Present Parks questions/ discuss details of conducting the survey b) Skate Park Project • Location — Groveland Park Neighborhood Meeting o Set Neighborhood Meeting Date —December 5th of 12" o Who/ How to invite —direct mailing, flyers, distance from Groveland 500' o Post Flyers at Community Center • What are the next steps o November 21st Meeting — discuss preparation for the meeting o November 22 — Mail / Deliver / Post Flyers o December 5th or 12th —Neighborhood Meeting o December 26th Parks Meeting — discuss / develop proposal for Council o January 6t11 Council Work Session — Present Skate Park Proposal o January 13t11 Council Meeting — Council approves Skate Park o January 23`d Parks Meeting — Finalize selection of vender and design o January 24th Staff places equipment order 4. New Business: a) Any other new business? 5. Commissioner/Staff Reports New Chair / Vice Chair person approval status — October 28th Council Meeting 6. Request for future agenda items/other business Possible Items for November 21 s'Agenda 0 Skate Park Discussion —Preparation for neighborhood meeting Park and Recreation Commission Minutes October 24, 2002 NO MEETING, LACK OF QUORUM. Park and Recreation Committee Meeting Agenda November 21, 2002 Roll Call 2. Approval of September 26th Meeting Minutes: 3. Unfinished Business: a) Community Survey • Draft questions in the Sept 26th minutes • Included in 2003 Draft Budget - $7,500 • Council Work Session —Present Parks questions/ discuss details of conducting the survey b) Skate Park Project • Location — Groveland Park • Neighborhood Meeting o Set Neighborhood Meeting Date —December 5th of 12th o Who/ How to invite —direct mailing, flyers, distance from Groveland 500' o Post Flyers at Community Center • What are the next steps it o November 21st Meeting — discuss preparation for the meeting o November 22nd — Mail / Deliver / Post Flyers o December 5th or 12th — Neighborhood Meeting o December 26th Parks Meeting — discuss / develop proposal for Council o January 6th Council Work Session — Present Skate Park Proposal o January 13th Council Meeting — Council approves Skate Park o January 23rd Parks Meeting — Finalize selection of vender and design o January 24th Staff places equipment order 4. New Business: a) Any other new business? 5. Commissioner/Staff Reports New Chair / Vice Chair person approval status — October 28h Council Meeting 6. Request for future agenda items/other business Possible Items for December 26th Agenda • Skate Park Discussion — discuss / develop proposal for Council Item No.7E Type of Business: CA WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Kathleen Miller, City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 707, an Ordinance Amending Title 100, Chapter 405 of the Mounds View City Code by Amending Section 405.02, Subdivision 1 as to the Appointment of Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission Date of Report: October 28, 2002 Background At the September 3, 2002 Work Session the City Council directed staff to amend the Municipal Code to reflect a reduction in the number of members on the Park and Recreation Commission from nine to seven. The Ordinance Proposing an Amendment to the Mounds View City Code by Amending Title 100, Chapter 405 of the Mounds View Municipal Code by Amending Section 405.02, Subdivision 1 as to the Appointment of Members of the Park and Recreation Commission was reviewed by the City Council at the October 14, 2002 City Council Meeting. This ordinance is back before you this evening for the second reading and adoption by the City Council. If adopted by the City Council, the Ordinance will be published in the Focus News and will take effect 30 days after publication. Respectfully Submitted, Kathleen F. Miller City Administrator G.Documents ane SedingslgreglLLocal SeltingslTempmery Internet Res10LKNonn 07E 2nd Rae Adopt. of ordinance 707 an Ordinance Amending Chpetloo 05 section 405.02 suhd 1 to Appolnl. o1 Members Pad S end Rea Cammisscn.doc ORDINANCE NO. 707 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 400, CHAPTER 405 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPALOF MEMBERS OF AMENDING SECTION RECREATION 1EATIIONCOMMI COMMISSION AS TO APPOINTMENT THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 405.02, Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Municipal Code relating to appointment of members of the Parks and Recreation Commission is hereby amended by the addition of the bold and double underlined language and the deletion of the boldand stricken language as o ows: 405.02: MEMBERSHIP; OATH; COMPENSATION: Subd. 1. Appointment of Members: The Commission shall consist of trine (-g).s.e=v=en= 7 members appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the majority of the Council. The Mayor, with approval of the City Council, shall appoint a chairperson at the first regular meeting of the Council in January. SECTION 2. This ordinance is effective 30 days after its publication. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this _ day of .2002. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this _ day of .2002. ATTEST: (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: ity Attorney Rich Sonterre, Mayor Kathleen Miller, Clerk -Administrator C)Docomen(s entl Camn05bre01LLocel Se11in0sVemporery Inlemet FIIes10LN2dtem OIE 2ntl REB Adopt. of ONinence 101 en ONinence A .Oln, ChpeOan 4055ecllon 405.02 s.W 1 to Appolnl. of Members paAs and ROD Comm1nion.doc - 405.02 (Rev. 2/99) 405.01 CHAPTER 405 PAS AND RECREATION COMMISSION' SECTION: 405.01: Commission Established; Purpose 405.02: Membership; Oath; Compensation 405.03: Terms and Vacancies 405.04: Conflicts of Interest 405.05: Removal from Office 405.06: Organization and Meetings 405.07: Powers and Duties 405.08: Budget and Finances 405.09: Rules and Regulations 405-01: COMMISSION ESTABLISHED; PURPOSE: There is hereby established a Parks and Recreation Commission for hpursuanadvising do tthe authorityf this the operation of public recreation, parks and playgrounds, Chapter. The Park and Recreation Commission is referred to herein as "the Commission". (1988 Code §34.01) 405.02: MEMBERSHIP; OATH; COMPENSATION: ers: The Commission shall consist of nine (9) members Subd. I. Appointment of Memb appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the majority of the Council. The l appoint a chairperson at the Mayor, with approval of the City Counci119881Code §34.02; Ord 627, 2-8-99)first regular meeting of the Council in January. Subd. 2. Oath of Office: Everyappointed member shall, before entering upon the discharge of their duties, take an oath that they will faithfully discharge the duties of their office. (1988 Code §34.03) Subd. 3. Compensation: Members of the Commission shall serve without compensation. 1988 Code I Sc 5 of this Code for parks, playgrounds and recreation. 405.03 405.06 (Rev. 1/00) 405.03: TERMS AND VACANCIES: Subd. 1. Terms: Members of the Commission shall serve three (3) year staggered terms, with terms expiring December 31 of each year. In order to establish appropriate staggering of terms for the commission members, appointments to a term of less than three (3) years are permissible. Both original and successive appointees shall hold their offices until their successors are appointed and qualified. (Ord. 456, 2-27-89; Ord. 646, 1-10-00) Subd. 2. Vacancies: Vacancies during the term shall be filled by the Mayor with the approval of the majority of the Council for the unexpired portion of the term. (1988 Code §34.03) 405.04: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: No member shall be personally interested in any contracts in which the Commission may enter. (1988 Code §34.03) 405.05: REMOVAL FROM OFFICE: Subd. 1. Removal for Just Cause: An appointed member of the Commission may be removed from office for just cause and on written charges by at least four-fifths (4/5) of the entire City Council. Such member may be entitled to a public hearing before such vote is taken. Subd. 2. Removal for Nonattendance: In addition, an appointed member may be removed by the City Council for nonattendance at Parks and Recreation Commission meetings if a Commission member does not attend (9) nine regularly scheduled meetings per year. Subd. 3. Vacancies Filled: It shall be the duty of the Chairman of the Commission to notify the City Council promptly of any vacancies occurring in membership. The Mayor, with approval of the City Council, shall fill such vacancies, for the unexpired term of the original appointment. (1988 Code §34.05) 405.06: ORGANIZATION AND MEETINGS: Subd. 1. Officers: The Commission shall select a Vice Chairman and Secretary from its membership who shall serve for terms of one (1) year. Subd. 2. Attorney and Engineer: The Municipal Attorney shall act as attorney for the Commission and the Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall act as its engineer. 405.07 405.06 Subd. 3. Rules of Procedure: At its first meeting, the Commission shall adopt rules o procedure and elect the two (2) officers. It shall amend the rules, from time to time, as is necessary. (1988 Code §34.06) Subd 4. Meetings: The Commission shall establish regular meeting dates, but special meetings may be called by any officer of the Commission upon three (3) days' notice to all members. The Commission shall meet at least twelve (12) times in each calendar year: Subd. 5. Quorum: A majority of the appointed members shall constitute a quorum. (1988 Code §34.07) 405.07: POWERS AND DUTIES: In order to carry on the recreation provided herein, the Commission shall: Subd. 1. Operation of City Parks and Playgrounds: Under the direction of the City Council, advise City staff to operate a program of public recreation and playgrounds upon property which is owned or otherwise made available to the Municipality for such public recreation purpose. Subd. 2. Lease and Acquisition of Property: a. Recommend to the Council the leasing or acquisition of real or personal property for public recreational use as it deems desirable but shall not have the authority to acquire land or construct buildings in its own name. Any equipment or recreational facilities shall belong to the Municipality. b. Advise the Council of leasing real or personal property or both for public recreation use for periods of not longer than one (1) year. Subd. 3. Maintenance and Care of Public Recreation Property: Maintain and care for all property which it has acquired sr-- and which has been assigned to it for public recreation purposes. Subd. 4. Inventories of Services: Make periodic inventories of recreation and park services which exist or may be needed and to interpret the needs of the public to the Council. Subd. 5. Cooperation with Other Agencies: Cooperate with other park and recreation departments, schools and private agencies for establishment of a joint powers agreement to provide parks and recreation services to the City residents. Subd. 6. Policies and Functions of Department: Interpret the policies and functions of the Park and Recreation Department to the public, 405.09 405.07 Subd. 7. Capital Improvement Plans and Budgets: Advise the Council and administrator in the preparation of the annual budget and long range capital improvement programs. Subd. 8. Rules and Regulations: Formulate and prescribe reasonable rules and regulations for the use of the general public of any facilities in any park area. Subd. 9. Construction of Improvements: Advise the Council on maintaining and constructing roadways, paths, buildings, fountains, docks, boat houses, bath houses, refreshment booths, anfr,. ' "" Conunturity Center, pavilions and other necessary structures and improvements in parks. The Commission may advise the Council on making contracts and leases for the construction and operation of these facilities for terms not exceeding ten (10) years. Every such contract and lease shall provide that the structure shall be operated for the public use and convenience, and that the charges shall be reasonable, and it shall reserve to the Commission power to prescribe reasonable rules and regulations, from time to time, for the conduct of the privilege. Subd. 10. Communication: Communicate regularly with the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission through joint meetings and meeting minutes. Subd. 11. Athletic Awareness: Be aware of the role and services provided by athletic organizations within the community. Subd. 12. Sanitation and Reforestation Programs: Advise the City Council regarding sanitation and reforestation programs within the City. Subd. 13. Other Duties: Do whatever other acts are reasonable, necessary and proper to carry out its prescribed powers and functions as set forth herein. (1988 Code §34.09) 405.08: BUDGET AND FINANCES: Subd. 1. Annual Presentation of Proposed Budget: The Commission, through the City Parks and Recreation Department staff, should present, no later than August 1 of each year, a proposed budget, in such details as the Council shall require, of the financial needs for the ensuing fiscal year to operate and maintain the parks and open spaces, as well as providing recreation programs. Subd. 2. Fees and Charges: The Commission shall advise the Council to establish charges or fees for the restricted use of any facilities or to make any phase of the recreation program wholly or partially self-sustaining. (1988 Code §34.08) 405.09: RULES AND REGULATIONS: The Council may establish such rules and regulations for the administration of this Chapter as it may deem necessary and may delegate such rule-making authority to the Commission, and the Commission shall have power to make such rules and regulations pursuant to delegated authority as it deems necessary for the purpose of performing its duties as herein set forth. (1988 Code §34.10) Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes November 21, 2002 Meeting Called to order: Szczepanski Roll Call: Szczepanski, Kunz, Silvis, Long, Kroeger, Dazenski, Roepke, Gunn Absent: Kahn, Lee Approval of the September, 2002 minutes with correction to Question #5; make it a 2 part question -a) & b): Motioned: Gunn 2nd; Long Unfinished Business: Community Survey Gunn stated that the committee is ready to go with what we've got. Szczepanski asked if a professional company should provide this service? The 2003 budget has $7500 set aside for this survey. Long asked if questions from other commissions be included. Kroeger stated that other commissions have not approached them with their questions and suggest that we move on with the survey. Gunn and Szczepanski agreed. Kroeger thought a professional service would be a good idea. Szczepanski agreed. Gunn suggested that this now be presented to the council at a work session. Let the council read it and decide to proceed or to include other questions. They will then approve to proceed with an outside source. Motioned: Silvis 2nd; Gunn Discussion: Gunn asked about a time line. Kroger proposes the 1" quarter in 2003. Szczepanski agreed. The motion is to bring this to a work session with the understanding that the commission is looking for a professional survey company to actually conduct the survey. Also that possible changes may be made to the questions by the company and/or council and to have this completed within the 1St quarter of 2003. Motion unanimously passed. Skate Park Szczepanski asked if everyone had an email that was sent out by Lee, 11-8-02? All agree on the Groveland Park tennis court location. Szczepanski proposes an additional site and utilizing the outside Community Center basketball court. Mayor Rich Sonterre came to the meeting. Sonterre stated that the council has talked about it and the Community Center makes sense because of the lack of people that use the outside basketball courts. Dazenski, Roepke, Gunn all disagreed. Roepke stated that they are used quite frequently. Sonterre stated the City doesn't have a lot of tennis courts and the Community Center has a security system. Kroeger agreed that security and safety is a good standpoint. Gunn stated that the base is not suitable for a skate park and that $55,000 is budgeted for the equipment. If this doesn't work out, we aren't out that much because the equipment can be sold and the tennis courts can be utilized again. With the Community Center site a new base would need to be put in. Kroeger asked if we could then go back to a basketball court if it didn't work out? Dazenski stated yes. Szczepanski asked how big of an area is the Community Center as opposed to Groveland Park tennis courts; tennis courts have the bigger area. Should the Police Department be on site or around at all times if this is still a concern? Gunn said that Groveland Park is out in the open, houses are around it and the tennis courts are fenced in. Roepke stated that the YMCA has no staff after 7pm. Dazenski said that the lights are on at Groveland Park and are controlled by a timer and will shut off at l Opm. Sonterre stated that the skate park should be a monitored site and what about changing the hours at the Community Center? He also asked what other sites were visited by the committee? Kroeger listed the sites. Sonterre stated that Shoreview and Roseville liked having a tie to their Community Center. Coon Rapids doesn't staff and they've had problems. Kroeger stated that his concern is about security, noise and lights. Sonterre asked if the exit door by the basketball court could be used so there would only be 1 access in and out of the park? Should we charge people to use it? Dazenski asked what about bathroom calls; people will not remove their skates to go into the Community Center. There is a satellite at Groveland Park. Kroeger thought the neighborhood meeting should still take place. Gunn stated that $55,000 was approved for 2003. Sonterre agreed but also said that the Park Dedication account could be used if necessary. Kunz stated that he does not want to take out a tennis court. Dazenski replied that in order to use the basketball court at the Community Center, the surface will need to be redone and that would cost approximately $18,000-20,000 because of its size. (It's uneven — a 6 inch drop.) This doesn't include the costs for fencing, landscaping and irrigation. Sonterre asked how many pieces does the equipment consist of? Gunn replied 7. Sonterre said that Mounds View isn't the size of Coon Rapids, should it be smaller? Keep it at a modest entry point and if growth is needed, so be it. Gunn replied that is why the committee decided on this size; it's bigger than New Brighton but not like Coon Rapids or Shoreview. Szczepanski agreed this is an entry level size park. Dazenski said that after talking with people, these size jumps, etc, are what they would want. Sonterre asked Dazenksi if the Parks Department could level off the Community Center area with blacktop? Dazenski replied yes. Sonterre asked if it should it be monitored for safety? Coon Rapids has a sign that states you are fully responsible if hurt, etc. What about having the users sign a liability waiver? Have the parents of the underage users sign it and keep on file at the Community Center. He also suggested having the users of the park to go through the lobby, past the front desk and with the camera's, that's adequate monitoring. Kroeger wants to abide by the decision to have a neighborhood meeting. Roepke asked if it would include the residents of Bronson Drive too? Kroeger replied yes. Szczepanski stated that he liked the security issue with having it close to City Hall and Police. Roepke stated that wherever we put it, the kids will come. Szczepanski would like it to be centralized in the City. The committee discussed the sizes of the proposed skate park. Kroeger stated that we could expand it if need be at the Community Center. Dazenski replied not really, there isn't a lot of room to expand. Sonterre asked how long will the skate boarding fad last? Gunn replied that's why the tennis courts at Groveland make sense because it could be put back as a tennis court. Kroeger asked where should the skate park go? Szczepanski suggested voting. Gunn replied we've already done that. Sonterre stated that whether the residents of Groveland do or do not want the skate park, the committee must make their decision on what is best for the City. In your opinion, what would be the better recommendation for the City as a whole. Gunn asked how close will the skate park be to the Community Center building? She expressed concern about the graffiti and damage to the walls. Sonterre stated that it will be televised by the camera. Dazenski said there would be nothing to vandalize at Groveland except the fence. The Community Center has block work and that would have to be sandblasted. He thinks there is a great potential for grafitti on the building. Also, there is not an existing water source, would we put in a fountain? Or should they come in the building all of the time? Dazenski also expressed his concern about using the emergency exit. There is a reason it is there; what does the fire code state? Motion to abandon Groveland Park as the site for the skate park and look more seriously at the Community Center. Motioned: Kunz 2"d; Szczepanski Discussion: None Motion unanimously passed. Followup: Direct Staff how to maintain a secure skate park at the Community Center. What is the building code regarding emergency exits. Kroeger motioned to direct Staff to find out what it will take to prepare the surface for skating. Also what it would take to provide a secure control in and out. 2nd by Szczepanski Discussion: Gunn would like a finding as to the impact of taking out the basketball court. Kroeger said this could be included when talking to the neighbors. Kroeger: Agree to amend motion. Motion unanimously passed Sonterre presented an "Outstanding Community Service Award" to Frank Silvis. Sonterre left the meeting. New Business: Kroeger asked if there is a breakdown of costs and expenditures for the Community Center Recreation programs, Management and Administration? Roepke replied that he can talk with accounting and get figures. Motion to have costs/revenue from the Community Center usage through Park and Recreation and provide them at the next meeting. Motion: Kroeger 2"d: Long Discussion: Szczepanski are you referring to the budget — the general overlay of it? Kroeger replied yes. Roepke said he can provide the program side of it versus the actual cost of administration. Gunn replied that she has the budget information and she'll look through it and she'll also talk to Charlie Hansen. Motion unanimously passed. Kroeger inquired on the bylaw revisions, has it been done and approved by council? Gunn replied that Lee was suppose to present this council and he'll have to report on this at the next meeting. Commission Staff Reports: Long asked if you can't attend a meeting, who should be notified? Committee agreed it r. should be Lee. Request for further agenda items: None Neighborhood Meeting 12-19-02 at 6:30pm, City Hall. Long motioned to adjourn: 2"d: Szczepanski December 26, 2002 meeting canceled due to Holiday. Next meeting will be on January 23, 2003. Respectfully Submitted: Tracy Juell No December 2002 Park and Rec Meeting City of Mounds View Memo To: Parks and Recreation Commissioners From: Greg Lee CC: Steve Dazenski Shannon Roepke Date: 12/19/2002 Re: Skate Park at the Community Center At the November 21, 2002 Parks and Recreation Meeting, the Commissioners changed their recommended Skate Park site location from Groveland Park to the Community Center. The Commissioners also made a motion to have staff identify costs associated with constructing a Skate Park at the Community Center. The following is a cost summary of items that would be associated with construction of constructing a Skate Park at the Community Center. RECONSTRUCT THE SURFACE THE BASKETBALL COURT - $20,000 in 34 feet—this would not be conducive to skate boarding or any other The existing court slopes 6" wheeled sport * If Public Works removes the existing bituminous $18,000 $4,500 FENCING Place a 10 foot cyclone fence around the Skate Park — three sides (105'X34'X34') $1,500 IRRIGATION ALTERATIONS The existing irrigation would need to be altered: relocate, raise sprinkler heads, change valveing. $2,000 LIGHTING need dd two nellights nate away from the building so as to iter. One light lluminate pole located further tobe mouttd on a the entire Skate Park. the $8,000 ENTRANCE DOOR To provide an entrance to the Skate Park area from the Community Center, to be constructed. This would an additional exterior security door would need need to be done in such a fashion so as to preserve or provide a new fire exit door. $1,000 SECURITY CAMERA Add two exterior cameras and run wire LANDSCAPE REMOVAL I REPLACEMENT $800 Remove existing shrubs and trees re -sod any disturbed area $400 SIGNAGE Signs stating the rules and operation of the skate park $720 TRASH RECEPTACLES Provide two heavy-duty trash receptacles $1,800 BENCHES Provide three heavy-duty benches RESTROOMS AND DRINKING FOUNTAIN the facilities inside the Community Center $0 Assume users of the Skate Park will utilize TOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS $38,720 The total 2003 budget for the Stake Park is $55,000. Therefore, there would only be $16,280 remaining to purchase equipment. Adding tax, the City's buying power is further reduced to $15,280 Infrastructure Improvements $38,720 Skating Equipment $14,710 956 TOTAL $54,386 Attached is a graphic from Skatewave showing a layout costing $14,710. FOR COMPARISON PURPOSES THE SAME EXERCISE WAS PERFORMED FOR THE GROVELAND SITE: RESURFACE THE TENNIS COURT (fill cracks and paint) $1,500 $400 SIGNAGE $720 TRASH RECEPTACLES $1,800 BENCHES PATHWAY TO RESTROOMS AND DRINKING FOUNTAIN BUILD $5,120 TOTAL Infrastructure Improvements $ 5,120 Skating Equipment $46,620 Tax $ 3,030 TOTAL $54,770 Attached is a graphic from Skatewave showing a layout costing $46,620. • Page 2 ESTIMATED ANNUAL SUPERVISION COSTS The following is a financial analysis of the cost to provide supervision for the Skate Park at the Community Center. ASSUMPTIONS: • Wages for person providing supervision - $7.50 per hour • Skate Park is open: 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday during school months 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Weekends during school months 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Everyday during non -school months • When the YMCA has the Community Center open for other activities, only one person is needed to supervise the skate park. When the YMCA does not have the Community Center open, two people will be needed to supervise the skate park (for safety reasons: one at the front desk ( one observing skating activities) The Community Center is open: . 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday during school months 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Saturday during school months 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sunday during school months 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday in June, July, and August 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturdays in June, July, and August Closed Sundays in June, July, and August ESTIMATED ANNUAL SUPERVISION COSTS: During school months (April May. September) M -F 40 hours, Sat. 15 hours, Sun. 21 hours = 76 man hours per week 76 man hours per week X 14 weeks = 1064 man hours 1064 man hours X $7.50 per hour = $7,980 June July, and August M -F 90 hours, Sat. 20 hours, Sun. 28 hours = 138 man hours per week 138 man hours per week X 13 weeks = 1794 man hours 1794 man hours X $7.50 per hour = $13,455 Total Estimated Annual Supervision Cost $7,980 + $13,455 = $21,435 IT WILL TAKE AN ESTIMATED $21,500 TO SUPERVISE THE SKATE PARK 0 Page 3 POINTS OF CONSIDERATION ❑ Looking at the big picture: This skate park was to be a trial project. The goal was to invest minimally in infrastructure improvements and evaluate the skate parks success or failure at the end of 2003. With the Groveland site, if is the project is a success, there is room for expansion. If it is a failure, the City can sell the state ramps at a very little over all loss to the City. The tennis courts could be reinstated for a very minimal cost. With the Community Center site, nearly $40,000 will need to be invested in the site preparation. If the project is a success, there is no room for expansion on this already small site. If it is a failure, the City will have wasted $40,000 in addition to the cost to convert the park back to basketball courts. ❑ Should a skate park be a success, the Groveland site allows for expansion. If it continues to grow in popularity, the City would always have the option to develop a larger regional skate park by purchasing the site to the south of the Community Center or developing a site with in the City Hall / Public Works complex. ❑ Reports from Public Works, Parks Division, and Police indicate that the basketball courts behind the Community Center are being used far more frequently and by far more people than the tennis courts at Groveland Park. The YMCA has confirmed that the basketball courts adjacent to the Community Center are used extensively. ❑ The Banquet Center has voiced a concern that a skate park may have a negative image for potential clients the City is trying to rent the facility to (Attached is a memorandum dated November 21, 2002 from Dabney Bradley — Banquet Facility Manager). The Center is also concerned for the personal property of visiting guests utilizing the Banquet Facility. ❑ Even with supervision and monitoring, there is a possibility graffiti on the Community Center will become an issue. ❑ The roof of the Community Center is 12 to 14 feet high. Installing a 10 -foot fence that adjoins to the Community Center will provide an access to the roof for juveniles. ❑ Addressing the concern of placing a skate park in a neighborhood area: There are four dwelling units that are adjacent to the Groveland Park tennis courts. There are 12 adjacent to the basketball courts behind the Community Center. ❑ Is it a realistic assumption that patrons of the skate park will take off their inline skates upon arriving at the Community Center, walk 70 feet through the center, and put them back on again? Then to repeat this every time they need to use the restroom or get a drink of water. ❑ Are there any other cities in the metro area, state, or the country that charges for a Tier I skate park? ❑ Skate boarding by its vary nature attracts people who can't afford other expensive organized sports. They are also very individualized people who avoid controlled environments. Given this, how successful will a small Tier I skate park be that charges a fee and is closely tied to government controls, rules, and regulation? Do we understand who the user of a skate park is? Are we meeting their needs? 0 Page 4 a a k F a n M To: Steve Dazenski — Parks Forman CC: City of Mounds View From: Dabney Bradley- Mounds View Community Banquet & Conference Center Date: 11/21/02 Re: Skate Park At The Community Center As per our discussion regarding the proposed skate park memo from Greg Lee — Dept of Public Works. After reviewing the proposal I have great concerns and reservations . While I am a great proponent of Community Center use for the residents of Mounds Views and with talking with other business associates the atmmosphere of the Banquet Center guests will be an issue for us. Most of the business associates have offered the following information when I asked about skat&oardeis. There is a heavy increase in graffiti and the perceived negative image of tli ;,.skateboarding following. My own concerns are the private property of visiting guesf.pafhe Banquet Center. Thank: you, Dabney Bradley- Mounds View Community Banquet & Conference Center December 2002 PARK AND RECREATION SURVEY QUESTIONS Survey Questions: 1. How often during the year do you use the Mounds View Parks? Please specify: Summer Winter Spring Fall All of the Above 2. How do you get to the Park(s)? Walk Drive Bike All of the Above How close are you to a Park(s)? (Please specify the Park(s) also)_ Why do you use the Park(s)? Walking Biking Child Surnmer Activities/Playground Family Organization Recreation Sports Other 4. In General, what do you think of the availability and condition of the Mounds View Park and Recreation features: Identifrcation/Signage Walking and Bike Paths Buildings Playground Equipment Picnic Areas Trees Fields (Softball, Soccer, Baseball) Rinks (Hockey and Pleasure) Open Space Nature Study How would you rate its features and condition? What other features would you like to see occur? Which Park is closest to your residence? 6. Would you support a bond issue for the development of items within the Park(s)? Do you want a Golf Course in Mounds View? 8. How would you rate the following: Surface Play Areas (Football, Soccer, Baseball, Softball, Open Play Fields) Lighted yes or no Marked Nature Trails Hiking/Walking Trails Bike Trails Cross Country Skiiing Sleding Golf Course Handball Basketball Volley Ball Shuffle Board Horseshoe Pits Playground Equipment Picnic Areas Shelter Buildings Hockey Rinks Pleasure Rinks Ampi-theater Skateboard Park Lawn Bowling Swimming Pool 9. What do you use the Community Center for? Exercise Equipment Banquet Center Gym