Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOMMISSION_MINUTES_2002-01-23Park 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.