HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-02-12 Park Board PacketAGENDA
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
PARK BOARD MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Minutes — Regular meeting on Tuesday, January 8, 2013
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT
During "Community Comment, " the Park Board will invite residents to share relevant
issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The
Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and
topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be
addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or
Board Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Board might refer
the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting.
VI. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Edible Playground Public Hearing — Lewis Park
B. Yorktown Park Pilot Community Garden Rules and Policies
C. Yorktown Park Pilot Community Garden Parking
D. 2013 Park Board Work Plan Schedule
E. Monarch Way Station at Arneson Acres Park
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
A. Council Updates
VIII. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
IX. STAFF COMMENTS
X. ADJOURNMENT
The city of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need
assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something,
please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES
OF THE MEETING OF THE
PARK BOARD
HELD AT SHERWOOD ROOM, EDINA SENIOR CENTER
January 8, 2013
7:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Steel called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
IL ROLL CALL
Answering roll call were Members Almog, Gieseke, Segreto, Jacobson, Dan Peterson, Deeds, Jones,
Steel
Member Cella arrived at 7:07 pm
New Parks and Recreation Assistant Director
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that Susan Faus has been promoted to the Assistant Director
position of the Parks and Recreation Department and will officially start her new position on January
14th. She introduced Susan and noted that she will be doing double and triple duty for a little while
until they get her position replaced as the General Manager of Edinborough Park and the Edina Aquatic
Center. Ms. Faus gave the Park Board a little bit of her history. Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board
she is going to be shuffling duties a little bit compared to the way they have been. She indicated that
she is going to maintain overall supervision of the enterprise operations but will be asking for Ms. Faus'
help on a variety of different issues especially in terms of how they can work better together as
enterprise operations for cost saving measures, technology, social media, marketing, etc. She added
that Ms. Faus will be supervising the recreation supervisors and provide them a lot of support to
continue to improve programming opportunities.
111. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
Member Segreto made a motion, seconded by Member Dan Peterson, approving the meeting
agenda.
Ayes: Members Gieseke, Segreto, Cella, Jacobson, Dan Peterson, Deeds, Jones, Steel
Motion Carried
IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA
Member Dan Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Segreto, approving the consent agenda
as follows:
IV.A. Approval of Minutes — Regular Park Board Meeting of Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Ayes: Ayes: Members Gieseke, Segreto, Cella, Jacobson, Dan Peterson, Deeds, Jones, Steel
Motion Carried
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT
None
V1. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
VI.A. Do.Town Presentation
Sara Maaske, Field Director for Do.Town, gave the Park Board an update on the Do.Town projects that
are being done in Edina.
Member Segreto asked what is their funding cycle and how long are they funded through. Ms. Maaske
replied they are funded as a staff through the end of March and so they will be doing several things as
they transition into the next three months. She indicated they are doing a telephone "Town Hall" with
the Mayor which is coming up on January 16th where they will be talking about creating healthier
communities. She noted they will also give the audience an opportunity to talk to the Mayor about
what they would like to see as well as things that may have happened already in their neighborhoods.
She stated from there they are going to be working with the residents they have worked with over the
last 12 to 18 months on transitioning and working to put forward the things that they have been
working with them in the community. Member Segreto asked about continuity; will there be any
involvement of staff or the city with the transition so they have a sense of follow through on all of the
projects? Ms. Maaske replied absolutely and that is a key component, not only are they going to be
doing some leadership training with residents but they will also be doing some leadership
conversations with the City whether it's the City Council, boards and commissions or City staff because
they want to make sure that it is integrated and folks are working together.
Member Jones asked Ms. Maaske if Do.Town went through all of these projects with the City Council
before they began working on them. Ms. Maaske replied not necessarily but that a lot of the projects
they chose to work on were based on resident input. She explained when they first started on the
campaign their job was to go out and talk to residents and find out what they would like to see in their
community to create a healthier community. She noted it was from those conversations that they
developed the different types of things they are working on but that they did communicate with the
City Council at all points throughout the conversation. Member Jones commented that as a Park Board
member she is confused that she wouldn't know, for example, there was a community garden being
proposed at Yorktown Park even though they were talking about what would be on their work plan for
the coming year. She stated she did not know there was a petition that Do.Town had started regarding
this and had no idea this was going to be on their plate and wondered how that happened. Ms.
Masske replied again that it was resident driven and it would be the same as if any neighborhood came
forward and asked you to look at X, Y and Z because they would like to make improvements. They
were just helping those residents gather the people together.
Chair Steel indicated that Do.Town has done a lot of grass roots work that the Park Board has not done
because it requires a lot of effort, funding and time; therefore, as they are starting their strategic
planning process she would like to ensure that they take any information Do.Town has collected so
they can include that in their priorities. Ms. Maaske replied absolutely and noted they have gathered a
data base of approximately 3,000 people to which approximately 700 of those individuals are Edina
residents. She noted those individuals expressed interest in specific things which is all in their database
and when they are no longer necessarily here physically it will be the city's database going forward.
Member Segreto stated they have done a great job of getting the name "Do.Town" out and thinks a lot
of their residents do understand what Do.Town is and asked is it a trade name or the name of a non-
profit because it would be a shame going forward if that disappears. Ms. Maaske replied she doesn't
have a definitive answer on that; however, she knows that Blue Cross Blue Shield are the ones who
own the "Do.Town" but thinks they probably do want to carry it forward if at all possible. Member
Segreto asked Ms. Kattreh if she sees any value in that to which she replied she does and they have had
that discussion as well so hopefully they can work it out with Blue Cross to move ahead.
Chair Steel asked what has happened in other communities like Albert Lea. Ms. Maaske responded
what happened in Albert Lea was that they carried forward with a non-profit organization, so that is
one model that could potentially do and one of the things that they were trying to do very differently
from what Albert Lea did was that they didn't really do a good job of engaging their residents around
this. They were more focused on getting the changes done at the City level and so when they left they
didn't really have a group of residents who were committed to these policies and these systems or
environmental changes that were happening in the community so they had to rebuild. They did end up
going like she said with a non-profit model in order to do that and she would assume that might be a
potential option she knows it is something that Mayor Hovland has been expressing interest in.
Member Jones indicated that she is on the Bike Edina Task Force and she doesn't remember a
representative from Do.Town talking to them about the safe routes to school. Ms. Maaske replied that
was led primarily by Bloomington Public Health and the consultant that was hired for that project came
in with all of the contacts available to them and it's been their job to be engaging with the residents
and folks in the City. She stated that frankly she doesn't think they have been doing a very good job
and that consultant firm will be building the plan for both Richfield and Edina. Ms. Maaske stated that
what they have expressed to the consultant firm is they don't think they have enough engagement
within the community to build an appropriate plan but she does know they have Bike Edina Task Force
as one of the contacts and that she does know that Katie Meyers had conversations with Bike Edina
Task Force about safe routes to school. Chair Steel stated any way they can improve communication in
the next couple of months would be great and also asked Ms. Maaske that if she has any updates that
she thinks the Park Board might find interesting to send it to Ms. Kattreh.
Member Cella asked Ms. Maaske to also keep the School District in the loop because she also feels
there have been times when Do.Town has been working on issues central to the schools but nobody
contacts the School District and the only reason they hear about it is because it is out in the
community. She indicated that she understands your focus is community organization but when it's
things that impact the schools it's the School District that makes the policies and get it done and if they
are not at the table it's not going to happen. Member Jones commented she feels in a similar way
about what has happened to the Park Board on a couple of issues because there are now new issues
that they have never discussed and are not part of their work plan. She asked why it wasn't brought
forward so that they could work collaboratively on it. Ms. Maaske replied she knows their campaign
manager, Alex, did meet with Chair Steel several months ago, but knows they have not come to the
group as a whole. She stated it is a pilot project and that they have learned they need to loop in the
boards and commissions at an earlier date because they learned a little too late down the line that the
boards and commissions have a key role in this as well. Member Jones replied it's not just the boards
but staff as well. She indicated these are really good ideas but folding them into a work plan so that it
doesn't burden staff has really been an issue with the City on many things. She stated there are a lot of
needs that they can all see that could improve Edina; however, what fits best and what they are
currently working on could really use your help but feels it is not as coordinated as it could be. Ms.
Maaske replied she feels like they have met a lot with City staff over the course of the Do.Town project
and communicated about different things and believes they did talk about community gardens early on
and if they didn't do it often enough or pointedly enough it is definitely something that they know they
need to wrap into.
Chair Steel clarified to the Park Board that this isn't on Ms. Maaske personally but that she did request
a meeting with Alex in August or September to ask that the Park Board get wrapped in the process and
that someone come and present before the Park Board. She noted that she didn't get a request to
appear before the Park Board until their November meeting so it was quite frustrating. She indicated
that she did hear what was going on and she wanted everyone to be collaborative; it's great work, you
are doing great things and there is a lot of information. Ms. Maaske replied point well taken and she
apologized if that didn't happen soon enough. Member Segreto stated on a go forward basis during
the transition period let's both make an effort to work hand in hand to which Ms. Maaske replied
absolutely.
3
Member Jacobson asked if there is a larger intent to maybe tie the community garden along with the
garden they discussed having at Lewis Park and do the whole thing at one time. Ms. Kattreh replied
they want to look at both of these community garden projects as pilot programs. She would like to see
how they go, have Park Board assess how it's working and costs associated with it, any problems or
positive outcomes, all sorts of things and so they definitely want to grow the garden slowly. Member
Jacobson asked so this year could be kind of a learning opportunity and then from that we will
Ms. Maaske commented that hopefully they will improve communications over the next three months
and be able to work together in the transition.
VI.B. Community Garden Committee for Yorktown Park
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that in the packet she tried to give the history of how they've
come to this point with the community gardens. She indicated that Do.Town has done a really nice job
of gathering community support for this project and other board and commission support for this
project as well. Ms. Kattreh noted that from staff's perspective she thinks it's pretty safe to say that
they were brought into this at the end of November and they do support this pilot project; however, as
Member Jones pointed out Park Board was also brought in late to the project. She stated if they have
support from the Park Board to pursue this pilot project at Yorktown Park, what they would be looking
for tonight is interested members who would be willing to serve on the committee. She added that the
goal for the project is to have it operational this summer which means they have a lot of work to do in
a little bit of time. The hope is to put together a group of Park Board members, Energy and
Environment commission members, Garden Council members, and Community Health Commission
members as well as interested residents, Do.Town and the YMCA.
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board they need to select a location and write some policies such as
what you would like to see in terms of a goal for the project, do you want specific plots that are for
seniors or specific plots that may be available for neighboring partners. She stated that she knows the
YMCA is very interested in a specific plot and how they would want the garden to look. Ms. Kattreh
commented gardens in different communities have different looks and some are better than others.
She noted that what she thinks she heard loud and clear from the group that gathered at the YMCA in
December is if it's going to be in an Edina park they want it to be a good representation of an Edina
park and want to make sure that the quality is there. For example, they are not going to allow
individual plot leasers to put up their own fencing but rather they would put up a nice attractive fence
and make sure it is done the right way.
Member Jones asked what the timeline is for this working group and is it this working group's mission
to create the policy for that park to which Ms. Kattreh replied correct. Member Jones asked has it
already been decided that there will be a park or is the working group going to recommend whether or
not there should be a pilot project for a community garden and if yes then they would come up with a
policy for the garden. Ms. Kattreh responded she thinks it's safe to say yes as well as have some good
conversations and that they have buy -in from the Park Board as to whether or not you feel this is a
good idea. She stated that there is a fair amount of support on the City Council for this project to at
least do it in a pilot fashion for the first year; however, if they do not have the support of the Park
Board to do the project it is important that that be known.
Member Segreto asked what issues need to be considered in light of staff time to which Ms. Kattreh
replied the Parks and Recreation Department will probably be the ones administering the project so
that would be leasing the plots. In addition, it would probably be parks maintenance staff that would
be responsible for doing the tilling at the end of the year as well as probably help with the construction
of the project. She noted that could be everything from the beds, possibly raised beds, to importing
soils to maybe even fencing. Ms. Kattreh pointed out there is also the complaint and issue side of
community gardens that can happen which can be pretty intensive from what they've heard from their
neighboring communities.
Member Dan Peterson commented the Edina is the only community in the western suburbs that
doesn't have a community garden and we need it. He indicated that there are probably two or three
community gardens in the area that will have all of the rules that we need that work and maybe we
could take those and adopt them.
Ms. Kattreh indicated that from a financial standpoint she thinks they have some partnership
opportunities with the YMCA.
Member Dan Peterson stated that he thinks there are a lot of master gardeners who would love to be
asked to give talks to kids or seniors for e.g., if you want tomatoes this is how to do it, etc. Ms. Maaske
commented that Whole Foods has actually expressed interest in this project as well as they offer
community grants. She indicated that another group that could be potentially tapped into would be
the Eagle Scouts, they could build raised beds, etc. Someone commented that it could be a May Term
project as well.
Member Jones noted that what she is hearing from this discussion is that the Park Board is in favor of
pursuing this as a pilot project, which she agrees it's a good idea; however, it is changing the use of a
park. She asked to make note that this is not land that is just not being used because it is being used
right now as open space and they need to discuss how they make those decisions. In addition, how are
they informing the neighbors of the decision?
Member Deeds asked Ms. Kattreh to go through Attachment C where they are talking about placing
the Community Garden. Ms. Kattreh pointed out the area as well as discussed as a pilot project they
would maybe like to have one of the large water containers brought to the site and if they did that
would they be able to utilize the YMCA parking lot to bring their water truck right up to it. She noted
the YMCA would provide parking to that site and would also provide the restrooms which is a nice
amenity because most community gardens have port -a -potties.
Chair Steel stated the action request is to select a few Park Board members to serve to provide
recommendations on a pilot project which includes location, costs, partnership opportunities, policy
and then the committee will provide a recommendation to the Park Board. She added there are going
to be members from other boards and commissions on the committee. It was asked if other boards
and commissions are going to have input as a whole or are they acting through their committee liaison.
Ms. Kattreh replied that the Community Health Committee has been the most active in the community
garden project to date and has had conversations with Scott Neal, City Manager, as to their exact
involvement. She noted as Member Jones pointed out they are using Park property and therefore she
personally thinks that it should be a Park Board recommendation to utilize this space as well as adopt a
policy for this program. Chair Steel asked about the time commitment for this working group to which
Ms. Kattreh replied she may be unrealistic but she would like to think they could achieve their goal in
two meetings.
Member Dan Peterson indicated if it's in the middle afternoon or later he would be happy to serve.
Member Jones indicated she could also serve.
I✓
Member Deeds made a motion, seconded by Member Segreto, to approve and support a community
garden at Yorktown Park.
Ayes: Members Gieseke, Segreto, Cella, Jacobson, Dan Peterson, Deeds, Jones, Steel
Motion Carried
Member Jones made a motion, seconded by Member Segreto, that Member Dan Peterson be the
Chair of the working group and that she serve.
Ayes: Members Gieseke, Segreto, Cella, Jacobson, Dan Peterson, Deeds, Jones, Steel
Motion Carried
Ms. Maaske commented that as she understands residents who are not currently serving on a
commission or board can participate to which Ms. Kattreh replied yes. Ms. Maaske noted that she will
make sure that the folks that were at the meeting know.
VI.C. 2013 Park Board Work Plan
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board the work plan they are looking at is what was approved by the
City Council with very few changes to the plan that the Park Board adopted. She noted in terms of
priority there are two areas that the Park Board should focus on first; the strategic plan and the
community gardens because they are trying to get those up and operational by this spring or summer.
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that the City Council has allocated $60,000 to the Park Board to
complete the study to which she has taken the liberty to contact one vendor to give the Park Board an
idea on what they should be able to expect based on the description the Park Board has put together
for the work plan. Ms. Kattreh passed around a couple of examples from two other cities: Coon Rapids
and Hastings. She explained that it addressed needs assessment using focus groups, park and open
space plans, trail system plans, ecological restoration plans or just ecological plans recreation, program
plans including multiple providers in a community, operations and maintenance plans and then
implementation plans. She indicated they would go through and take a look at individual parks and
individual enterprises in our system based on what the Park Board feels are the areas of priorities.
They would look at the parks and facilities and give us an idea of utilization or recommendations for
improvements to parks and then they would put priorities and even dollar amounts associated with
those. She stated that she thinks it would give the Park Board a really good planning tool for changes
to parks, changes to programming and budget allocations.
Member Jacobson asked if they currently have a master plan for every park to which Ms. Kattreh
replied for every park they do not. She explained that the parks previously referenced do have master
plans because they have done or are going to be doing some major renovations. She explained that it
would not be to the extent of what they have done to Countryside Park nor do they want it to be to
that extent because things can change and that gives them the ability for input. They need to find out
if they are utilizing the parks well or tell us here are some ideas that we could do differently to improve
our parks.
Member Deeds commented that is down low and in the weeds before there is an actual discussion and
thought process on what should the park system look like in 2025 and in 2040 in Edina and how do we
overcome the disadvantages of the small distributed park system that we have. He pointed out there
is a big picture and there are questions that need to be answered before any of that does. Member
Deeds indicated that he does this for a living and what happens is they go on a shelf and they are
absolutely worthless and it's a waste of $60,000. He stated if it's not a living, breathing document it
becomes a failure because you go down in the weeds before it developed a vision of what's going to
happen; it's not about having individual park plans, it's about what is the vision for Edina Parks &
6
Recreation for 2025 and 2040 and how are we going to get there and what does that mean. He noted
they have an infrastructure right now and it may not be the right one and so the first question is what
is it that the City should be striving to be and be striving towards in its parks system. He stated that he
doesn't think it's ever actually been thought through. He thinks there is not that level of vision or
thought process that has gone into it. He added that it's very incoherent and very inconsistent; they
have stuff going on here and a little stuff going on here and some stuff drops in over here, etc.
Member Cella commented that she agrees with Member Deeds. It's crisis management. Whatever
new great idea for one area comes up they deal with that. She stated they are still not solving the
over -arching strategic focus of what it is we want our parks and recreation to do in Edina. Member
Segreto stated that vision is not going to be fabricated by the person writing the plan to which Member
Deeds replied no, absolutely not.
Member Deeds explained that the first stage of assessment is essentially a competitive assessment
because we compete with surrounding cities and in the park system right now they are at a
disadvantage if you compare what they have relative to the next ring out like Eden Prairie, Minnetonka
and Wayzata because they have larger, newer facilities. Therefore, there is a level of assessment that
they need to do and then figure out what we want. However, before they get to this level of planning
the City Council has to get on board and say "yes", that's a vision we are going to work towards
because these are big decisions and they are very expensive decisions.
Member Jacobson commented that it sounds like a two-phase project, first you have a consultant who
does a community assessment or a needs assessment. Member Deeds replied they already have some
of that but there is a level of just a very basic competitive position, competitive assessment that needs
to be done simply beyond what the citizens want because if they want to stay thriving they need to
continue to attract people in. He noted they are an inner ring older suburb and they need to figure out
a way to maintain a competitive position and be a desirable location for people to relocate to.
Chair Steel noted that she thinks Member Deeds is hitting at all of the right points and she definitely
wants it to be a document that is used and very practical; however, this is going to be a giant priority
going forward. She proposed for the next meeting the Park Board members submit ideas to Ms.
Kattreh with questions you want answered and things you want to look at because they need time to
think about that and they are not going to come up with the right components now. She noted that
Ms. Kattreh will put all of the information she receives together and maybe highlight the things that
she thinks would work well and then continue the discussion in much more detail at the next Park
Board meeting.
Member Cella commented that in looking briefly at the two examples passed around it looks like the
most useful things would be their vision and policy plans which are the first five pages. It looks like that
is where they received input from community groups, users, the school district, etc. and then put
together a vision where they have their park vision, their open space vision, their trail vision, etc.
There is a vision for everything and they have some goals and objectives and some rules of the road of
how they are going to get there. Member Deeds commented that those are where the value is
because of those kinds of decisions. He indicated the world changes by the minute and when the rest
of it begins running into reality the question is making decisions based on the vision and we don't have
a vision.
Chair Steel asked the Park Board if it would be helpful at the next meeting to provide some City wide
contents of visions. Member Deeds replied as well as demographic projections, because one of the
things that is kind of unique about this challenge is the timing is so much longer than most because
7
when dealing with corporations you plan maybe five or seven years of the outside maybe a little
longer. However, when you talk about parks and infrastructure like this it's a substantially longer
planning process because it doesn't change quickly. Member Cella commented that it's very similar to
what they are doing at the school district because they are in a community where people expect a
certain amount of excellence but your infrastructure is old and aging and not in the shape that the
other suburbs are but everyone expects that. She stated they are head and shoulders above everybody
else but yet you don't have the same facilities and so how do you make that work. Member Deeds
commented and how do you bring those facilities up so that they present the image that you want as a
community. He pointed out that it's critical to somebody coming in and out of town and they need to
make an offer on a house within 72 hours and will probably choose from all three communities and
drive through and some of the parks look a little run down.
Chair Steel commented that she is so thankful that the City Council gave them a little money to work
with and she thinks this is really key to their work.
Ms. Kattreh stated what Member Deeds expressed is exactly what she feels is important as well, we
don't want the Park Board to get caught up in the minutia of a swing set at a park; it's the bigger
picture vision and it needs to be a working document and a blueprint for the future of our park system.
She stated that she looks forward to receiving Park Board's input and at that point they would put
together a request for qualifications for potential consultants.
Member Segreto asked what does this note on the bottom of the page from the City Council really
mean that states "the City Council would like to focus on parks strategic plan during 2013 and has
altered goals related to the Senior Center and Wooddale Park to reflect this focus". Ms. Kattreh
replied it means they would really like us to focus on the strategic plan and not make the Senior Center
as high a priority. She explained the Wooddale Park plan was moved down because of some of the
concerns expressed by the Park Board as to how this got put so high on the priority list. In addition,
they felt that a strategic plan should address some of these issues so that the Park Board has a better
opportunity to make decisions.
Member Jones indicated in looking at the two books being passed around she agrees there are whole
sections she thinks they could leave out especially if they only have $60,000. She asked if there is some
type of listing of normal compliments of a strategic plan, what other cities include in their strategic
plans. Member Deeds replied he doesn't know for parks and recreation particularly but yes, there is a
format for a strategic plan. Member Jones commented she does want to limit that because it's wasting
time. Member Cella stated that they don't need to reinvent the wheel if there are 3, 4 or 5 good park
plans that other cities have done and see what components are in their vision and then if they see
those components, she doesn't even know that they need a consultant to help them work through
that, they could maybe facilitate them working through their vision. She stated there is no consultant
that is going to come in and tell them what their vision is, if they can't come up with a vision as a Park
Board then they have other issues.
Member Jones noted maybe this would be a retreat issue to which Member Deeds replied that or
perhaps some focus groups and other things. He explained that focus groups are tricky things and that
is where you want to get somebody who actually knows what they are doing. He would see the budget
going less having some consultant write a report for them then having somebody be able to do some
pretty solid market research, community needs assessment, because 2006 is 6 years old. Have some
focus groups and discussions and try and understand what the various segments, both demographic
segments as well as geographic segments, of the community are interested in.
Chair Steel stressed to the Park Board that it is on them to bring the brainpower to the table, it's going
to be a little more work than looking at specific projects. Member Deeds suggested the best thing for
next meeting for him would be a thorough a comparison of our infrastructure, etc. in the parks and
recreation area to Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, etc. If they have a real good assessment of what they
have and what they don't, relative to what they had as a starting point. Ms. Kattreh noted that in one
document that they have access to the Proragis document that they did through the National
Recreation Park Association because they can put in any filters they want to compare to other
communities throughout the country. He stated maybe there are some other very well-known
communities that are kind of the standard of excellence that are worth benchmarking against,
particularly if there are some like us that are an inner -ring burb that is older and that has done some
interesting things.
Member Segreto asked at what point does the reality of our budget impact the strategic plan because
she has seen a lot of plans with great visions and ideas; however, there is no money to execute them.
At what point does the reality of the budget impact the planning process. Member Deeds replied you
begin to prioritize and then you go back to the decision makers, in this case it's the City Council, and
you are either going to go out for a bond issue or you are going out for a bond and raise 20 or 30
million dollars for parks and recreation. Member Deeds explained your first cut is to present options
to the decision makers so you go through and assess where are we weak, where are we missing the
boat, etc., and where are the opportunities. Then you put together plans from this is the vision here
and you put together price tags on them and then you go back to the decision makers before you go
any further and you dig any deeper and you waste any more time. Member Segreto asked so it's an
advocacy. Member Deeds stated before you waste any more time you either get thumbs up or thumbs
down because there is no sense in going down into the weeds and going down into the level of detail
and pushing through on everything if there is not the budget and support to do it.
Member Gieseke informed the Park Board that the Mayor asked him if he could do anything with Fred
Richard's Golf Course what would you do. Where are our strengths, where are our weaknesses, how
do we compete and what would you turn that into to draw young couples and their children and keep
the school system strong. Member Jones commented that brings up a really good point because they
spent money on a golf consultant and were told that was not within the scope of looking at that and
that we could not suggest to the golf consultant that it would not be anything other than a golf course.
She stated that is the type of direction they need if they ever go into hiring out a consultant. They
need to make sure they understand what is on the table as well as what can and cannot be on the
table.
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board cost recovery goals for enterprise facilities did receive City Council
approval and she would think that would be something they could start mid to late year as they are
approaching the budgeting process and business plan process again this year.
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board regarding Garden Park baseball renovations they did not receive
the large grant that they were hoping for; however, they did receive a $25,000 grant for batting cages
and they still have $100,000 on the table from the Edina Baseball Association and $100,000 matching
from the City CIP. She will be working with that group so they will have something for the Park Board.
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that regarding the Lake Edina pathway she thinks it is something
that will not involve a ton of Park Board time although they will be hosting some public hearings on the
project.
0
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board regarding the Countryside Master Park they are hoping to receive
approval from the City Council at the end of January and will hopefully start construction on the project
this spring.
Ms. Kattreh indicated to Member Segreto's point about the Senior Center she still thinks it's a really
great project for them to take a look at this year just maybe hold off until the middle or second half of
community gardens started and thinks the middle of the year would be a good time to put together a
committee to work on that. Chair Steel asked Ms. Kattreh to put together a tentative calendar
knowing that the strategic planning process is going to kind of rule the schedule for the next meeting.
Member Dan Peterson informed the Park Board that it was discovered by the soccer field study group
that the church on Tracy Avenue on the south side of the Crosstown is in financial trouble and if
anything happens he thinks the City and Park System should buy it. Member Deeds commented that is
the perfect site for the sports dome. Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that they have had
discussions with the church about the property and that the City's Economic Development Coordinator
talked to the church and reported his findings to the City Council and the City Council has decided that
they are not interested in pursuing that property at this time. She noted she has not been involved
personally in any of the conversations but does know there are legal issues associated with the
property that the city did not want to get tangled up in. Member Deeds commented that they have so
little remaining undeveloped space that when something like this comes up they can't let it pass.
Member Dan Peterson indicated that he would be interested in joining other programs with other
suburban park systems like Bloomington and Eden Prairie. They probably have more available land for
a dirt bike path, etc., and just because it happens to be in someone else's territory doesn't mean our
folks couldn't use it. It's a good way to share and reduce costs.
Member Cella commented that it states under the Other Work Plan Ideas Considered for Current Year
or Future Year "Cooperative agreement with School District for use, upgrade and maintenance at Creek
Valley Park athletic fields and Cornelia School Park athletic fields' and asked what the status is. Ms.
Kattreh replied there really is no status update at this point but there are conversations that she thinks
they need to have in 2013. They have very unusual situations at Cornelia and Creek Valley where the
school is on city property and the city is on school property and added that she thinks they are
probably very easy for them to work out. Member Cella indicated that when they are ready to have
those conversations to talk to her because she is the Treasurer of the School Board and the chair of the
Financing Facilities Subcommittee.
Member Dan Peterson asked if the golf dome should that be part of this to which Ms. Kattreh replied
she was going to report on that briefly under staff comment. She informed the Park Board they are
struggling with their insurance provider, they still have not received a settlement offer from them but
she is hoping to have a settlement offer by the end of next week. At this point they are hopeful they
will have a dome open by October but that there is going to be a significant difference between their
insurance and what it's going to cost them to rebuild the dome and excess rebuilding at this point a
very rough number is approximately $800,000. Member Deeds asked does that then put them at a
point of actually considering whether we rebuild a golf dome. Ms. Kattreh replied that the number
could get to the point where the City Council could say we are not going to do it, it's definitely a
possibility. She added they have already spent a fair amount of money on the consultants to get them
to the point where they've already bid two aspects of the dome, the turf and the fabric so they have a
lot invested in the program. She noted that one other thing is the fact that the dome burned down
because of an electrical error of some type; however, they don't know if it was an equipment failure or
10
a contractor failure but there might be an opportunity for them to pursue legal action with them as
well.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
None
VIII. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
Member Dan Peterson commented that the reason he brought up the golf dome is because two or
three folks called him at home asking what is going on. He thinks it would be useful if something could
be put on the City's website with updates of what is going on such as funding, the golf dome, sports
dome and golf practice facilities for the summer, etc. Ms. Kattreh replied they do have the City Extra as
an option where people have the ability to sign on to different components. She indicated they have
not done a good job of utilizing that and it is another initiative staff will be working on.
Member Jacobson asked if the park reservations system is in place that Mr. Keprios referred to last
year. Ms. Kattreh replied no, their website implementation has been much slower than they had
hoped and they are still wrestling with their online registration portion of it. She noted once they get
that component operational, they will be rolling into the facility registration.
Member Jones congratulated the park maintenance staff for their ice rinks and informed the Park
Board there were professional hockey players, thanks to the strike, playing a pick—up game at
Highlands Park.
Member Deeds would like to congratulate whoever was involved in having the good insight to hire Ms.
Kattreh. Ms. Kattreh replied she appreciates that and is very excited about the opportunity and looks
forward to working with the Park Board more closely and added her door is always open.
Member Deeds asked when they are reviewing the enterprise facilities will there be any opportunity
for discussion about whether or not they are appropriately classifying the enterprise facilities to which
Ms. Kattreh replied she thinks that is a great opportunity to have that discussion.
IX. STAFF COMMENTS
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that regarding the Sports Dome update she has been working
with the associations to gather field use data. She noted that hopefully they will be compiling that
within the next month or two. In addition, she has also been working with Cunningham, Anderson and
Johnson on very, very preliminary layouts for potential dome options at the Braemar athletic field site.
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that the Naming and Donations Work Group will go before the
City Council work session on January 22nd to get their feedback.
Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that the Edina Swim Club's residency requirement for their
priority use of the Aquatic Center will be on the City Council's January 22nd agenda. She explained the
reason they are going right to the City Council is because it was a City Council action that put this policy
in place. She indicated that the Edina Swim Club is not able to achieve the 75% residency requirement
so they are requesting that percentage be lowered to probably 60%. She stated that she feels very
confident they will be able to achieve 70% but if not she doesn't want to have to do it again.
Member Peterson asked if there has been any word on the Veteran's project with the fundraising. Ms.
Kattreh replied she believes they do have someone that is in charge of fundraising and informed the
Park Board that Mr. Keprios is also staying involved on that committee. She noted they are going
11
strong on trying to continue to raise funds and get the project off the ground. Member Dan Peterson
asked what the status is to which Ms. Kattreh replied in pledges and donations she believes they are
just under $150,000. They need a much more aggressive fundraising effort and that is what they hope
to be kicking off in 2013.
Member Jones asked if there are any openings coming up for the Park Board to which Ms. Canton
replied three people are up for re-election which she believes all will be returning. Member Segreto
indicated that she has applied to be on the Three Rivers Park Commission and is not sure if there might
be a contlict of interest of being on the Park Board and the Three Rivers Commission.
Member Jones stated that she knows other Boards and Commissions have had their attendance
records available at each meeting and asked Ms. Canton if it would be possible for her to bring the Park
Board attendance to their meetings. Ms. Canton replied starting next month she will do that.
Meeting adjourned at 8:35 pm.
To: PARK BOARD
From: Ann Kattreh, Director
Parks & Recreation Department
Date: February 12, 2013
Subject: Edible Playground Public Hearing — Lewis Park
Agenda Item #: A. A.
Action
Discussion ❑
Information ❑
Action Requested:
Staff requests a Public Hearing and approval of the Edible Playground Proposal for Lewis Park.
Information / Background:
At the December 12, 2012 Park Board meeting:
Member Deeds made a motion, seconded by Member Segreto, to approve the notification of the
neighbors.
Ayes: Members Steel, Kathryn Peterson, Gieseke, Jacobson, Segreto, Cella, Jones, Deeds
Motion Carried
On January 15, 2013, a letter was mailed to notify resident neighbors of the proposed Edible
Playground within 1,000 feet of Lewis Park and requested their input on the proposal. Residents
were also notified about the February 12`h Public Hearing at the Park Board Meeting.
The proposal is a staff request to build a 20 foot by 30 foot cedar wood fenced -in area
immediately west of the most westerly rectangular athletic field at Lewis Park, 7300 Cahill Road,
that would fence in 10 different raised planter beds for planting and harvesting vegetables, two
benches and a storage unit similar to Eden Prairie's Edible Playground (please see attached
photos). The program is in keeping with the Do.town initiative and Get Fit City initiative.
In her "Action Plan" shown below, City of Edina Recreation Supervisor Kristin Aarsvold has
done an excellent job recruiting volunteers from Dow Water Process Solutions and the Edina
Garden Council to participate in this project. She has also secured funding from Dow's "Keep
America Beautiful" initiative and from the Edina Resource Center. She has also requested a
$5,000 grant request from the Fairview Foundation and additional funding opportunities may be
available through the Bloomington Public Health in conjunction with the Statewide Health
Improvement Program,
City of Edina - 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424
REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Page 2
Edible Playground Action Plan
Submitted By: Kristin Aarsvold, Recreation Supervisor
PREMISE: Over the past ten years, childhood obesity has been on the rise. Unfortunately,
79% of school children in the United States do not get the recommended daily allowance of
fruits and vegetables. (CDC Youth Risk Behavior survey, 2009) Lewis Park is the proposed site
of the City of Edina's first Edible Playground. The park is in south central Edina, near Oak Glen
apartments. Oak Glen is located in a Censu
ten years. The racial demographics have shifted with a 294% growth in black residents and
210% growth in Hispanic residents. In addition, this area of Edina has witnessed a 27% decrease
in median household income in the past decade. Oak Glen currently welcomes families who are
receiving government subsidies for housing, such as Section 8. Census information was
provided by the Edina Resource Center.
As recreation providers we have the opportunity to teach gardening skills as a lifelong leisure
pursuit as well as make the connection to healthy foods for fueling young bodies for being
active. Eden Prairie Parks and Recreation built their first Edible Playground in 2012; plans for an
Edible Playground in Edina are based on their efforts. Registered playground program
cal playground games and
crafts offered for youth ages 6-10. The Edina Playground program runs from June 17- July 24 on
Mondays and Wednesdays from 1-4 p.m. at Lewis Park. Grants -in -Aid are provided for families
who cannot afford the $36 registration fee. In addition, Garden Camps will be offered the first
3 weeks of August.
GOALS: The goals of creating an Edible Playground are:
1. Provide a hands-on opportunity to teach kids about gardening (food production and a
lifelong leisure skill). Goal attained through participants tending garden, visits from Edina
Garden Council members and written resources provided for participants and families.
Outcome will be measured in end -of -program evaluations.
2. Inspire kids to eat healthy and nutritious food through fun activities and visits from
nutritionists to malting healthy snacks. Outcome will be measured in end -of -program
evaluations.
3. Help kids understand and appreciate the importance of how fresh foods fuel bodies for
healthy and active living. Outcome will be measured in end -of -program evaluations.
PROGRAM DESIGN: The Edible Playground will be built with a volunteer pledge from Dow
Water Process Solutions employees as a part of their "Keep America Beautiful Initiative". The
garden will be maintained by participants in the Edina Playground Program with oversight by
Recreation Supervisor, Site Leader and Playground Leaders. A weekly curriculum will be
developed using the U of M Extension Service and other available resources like Bloomington
Public Health. Parks & Recreation staff will measure outcomes through an end -of -season
evaluation. Pizza and salsa plots will be planted as a way to make the connection between the
REPORT / RECOMMENDATION
garden and the table. A "Harvest Dinner" will be held for participants, families, volunteers in
late August. Dow Water Process volunteers have pledged to oversee the garden during the off-
season as needed.
PROGRAM TIMELINE:
MARCH 2013 Funding secured
APRIUMAY Construction begins
LATE MAY Planting by Dow Water Process Solutions volunteers, participants enrolled
at Lewis Park and targeted ELL students/families
JUNE- AUGUST Playground participants and staff maintain, tend and learn about healthy
eating during program hours
AUGUST Garden camps and end -of -season "Harvest Dinner" with volunteers,
participants, families and community members
SEPTEMBER Put garden to bed
ESTIMATED BUDGET:
EXPENSES:
$2,000 Storage Shed
$2,000 Fence Materials
$5,000 Planters
(*in-kind labor to build the garden has been pledged by Dow Water Process Solutions
volunteers)
$100 Soil
$775 Gravel Base
$350 Plants/Seeds
$200 Small Tools and Equipment
$325 Mailings and postage/newsletter and curriculum printing/signage
$250 Volunteer recognition, video production costs, harvest dinner supplies
$11,000 Total Expenses
Page 3
REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION
REVENUES:
$1,000 Pledge from Dow's "Keep America Beautiful" Initiative
$1,500 Pledge from Edina Resource Center
$5,000 At this time a $5,000 grant has been submitted to the Fairview Foundation;
potential funding has been requested from Bloomington Public Health through the
Statewide Health Improvement Program.
$3,500 Parks and Recreation Department 2013 operating budget.
$11,000 Total Revenues
Long- term sustainability includes $500 per year for seeds/plants/soils and maintenance. This
will be folded into program expenses partially covered by program and camp fees.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Neighborhood notification and Public Hearing letter
• Hand -drawn Layout Diagram of the Proposed Edible Garden
• Aerial Map of Lewis Park Showing Location of the Proposed Edible Garden
• Two Photos of Eden Prairie's Edible Garden
Page 4
January 15, 2012
Dear Resident Neighbor of Lewis Park:
This letter is to inform you of a proposal from the Edina Parks and Recreation Department to construct
and program an Edible Playground at Lewis Park. A proposal was discussed at the December 11, 2012
Edina Park Board meeting, with unanimous support from Board members.
Over the past ten years, childhood obesity has been on the rise. Unfortunately, 79% of school children do
not get the recommended daily allowance of fruits and vegetables (CDC Youth Risk Behavior survey,
2009). Participants in the summer playground program and camps at Lewis Park will be the main
beneficiaries of the Edible Playground. The plans for the Edible Playground are based on a successful Edible
Playground in Eden Prairie.
• Garden dimensions are 20 foot by 30 foot cedar fenced in area immediately west of the most
westerly rectangular athletic field at Lewis Park.
• The garden would fence in 10 different raised planter beds for planting and harvesting vegetables,
two benches and a storage unit similar to Eden Prairie's Edible Playground (please see attached
photos).
• The garden and storage unit will be locked during unsupervised hours.
• Dow Water Process Solutions has pledged funding as well as volunteer support to build and
oversee the garden as needed throughout the year.
Total project construction costs are estimated to be approximately $11,000. Funding has been pledged
from various sources to cover these costs.
The Edina Park Board will meet in the Council Chambers in City Hall beginning at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday,
February 12, 2013 to take final action on this proposal. As always, the public is welcome to attend the
meeting and speak, to this topic in the Public Hearing portion of the meeting.
The goals of creating an Edible Playground are to provide a hands-on opportunity to teach kids about
gardening (food production and a lifelong leisure skill), to inspire kids to eat healthy and nutritious food
through fun activities and visits from nutritionists to making healthy snacks and to help kids make the
connection between how fresh food fuel bodies for being active. If you have any questions about the
proposed Edible Playground or process, feel free to contact me directly. To share your comments with the
Park Board about the proposed project, please send them to me in writing either by postal mail or email.
All correspondence will be forwarded to the Park Board. Many thanks.
Respectfully,
Ann Kattreh, Director
Edina Parks and Recreation Department
(952) 826-0430
akattreh aQ.EdinaMN.gov
r
- - STK �8 •.8'oS- - - - - - - -- - - .
- b
lar 3'-955--�-_---
- - E EpB A -kzS
IT- -
� � pPa lg -3ys
_ .. I i
�fs�3 )F�=3q_S SUB 12,34s
Al r� ranxl t� :�i A�c111G � Cw,T�gr {C t LC ;t; G152?li
iflur jthkk
s
w
To: PARK BOARD
From: Ann Kattreh, Director
Parks & Recreation Department
Date: February 12, 2013
Agenda Item #. A. B.
Subject: Yorktown Park Pilot Community Garden Rules and Policies
Action N
Discussion ❑
Information ❑
Action Requested:
Staff requests the Park Board approve the proposed Yorktown Park Community Garden Rules
and Policies
Information / Background:
A brief history of recent community garden discussions:
• 2009 — City of Edina assesses public spaces for community gardens, action was tabled at that
time
• March 2012 — City Council members expressed a desire to revisit the community garden
question on public land
• March to June 2012 — do.town community conversations identifies a base of supporters
• July 2012 — City Council encourages community health committee to add community
gardens to their work plan
• August 6, 2012 — Mayor Hovland and the Council proclaimed Aug. I I th as Community
Garden Day — recognizing ALL a community garden brings to your community
• August 7, 2012 — do.town begins letter writing campaign City Council and Community
Health Committee — 7 letters generated
• September- 2012 — do.town administers a petition drive at The Durham — resulting in 47
signatures
• October/November 2012 — Community Health Committee recommends to City Council a
pilot community garden at Yorktown Park
• November 2012 — do.town meets with the Southdale YMCA to confirm their interest in
partnering on a community garden project
• December 2012 — do.town hosts a meeting at the Southdale YMCA (see attached meeting
notes)
• January 8, 2013 — The Park Board selected Ellen Jones and Dan Peterson to serve on the
City of Edina • 4801 W. 5011, St. • Edina, MN 55424
REPORT / RECOMMENDATION
Yorktown Community Garden Work Group and nominated Dan Peterson to serve as the
Chair of that Committee.
• January 2013 — Staff collected community garden data from 16 neighboring communities,
compiled the data, completed a project timeline and prepared a Draft Rules and Policies
document.
January 30, 2013 — Recreation Supervisor Donna Tilsner, Assistant Director Susan Faus and
Director Ann Kattreh hosted the first Yorktown Park Community Garden Work Group
Meeting. There were a total of 9 members present at the meeting in addition to Parks &
Recreation Department Staff and Bob Prestrud, our Parks Maintenance Supervisor. The
agenda is attached. The work group made several comments regarding the rules and policies
which are reflected in the proposed Rules and Policies document.
Work Group volunteers are from the Energy and Environment Commission, Edina Health
Committee, Edina Garden Council, Heritage Preservation Board, Southdale YMCA and other
interested residents. The final goal of the committee will be to provide a recommendation to
the Park Board regarding a pilot community garden project at Yorktown Park. The Committee
will determine location, cost, partnership opportunities and policy recommendations for a
proposed garden.
As you will notice on the timeline, the schedule is incredibly tight and there is no room for
error or delays. We will do our very best to move the project efficiently through this timeframe
to provide a community garden opening date in May of 2013.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Community Garden Rules and Policies
B. Yorktown Park Community Garden Timeline
Page 2
COMMUNITY GARDENS RULES AND POLICIES
CITY OF EDINA
RULES
Ensuring enjoyable gardening experience for all of the garden community is the primary goal of these
rules. For this reason, observe the rules of the garden, and be a good neighbor.
PLANS
I . The size of the plots will be approximately I Ox 10 and I Ox 15 in size.
2. There will be a fee of $25 for a I Ox 10 and $30 for a I Ox 15 plot.
3. Payment can be in the form of a check payable to: City of Edina. We also accept VISA,
MasterCard and American Express.
4. A waiting list will be maintained if garden plots fill. The waiting list will be based on the date the
application form is received.
5. Gardeners may purchase one plot per household.
6. Gardeners may begin planting the second Saturday in May, weather permitting. In 2013 this is
May I Ith. All gardens must be planted by June 3. If you are unable to meet this deadline, please
contact the City of Edina.
7. All non-organic materials must be cleaned out by October 30. Plots will be tilled over after that
date.
CITY OF EDINA RESPONSIBILITIES
I. City will plow, till, drag, measure and stake out the gardens in the spring.
2. City will till the plots after October 30.
3. City will take registrations and payments for the plots.
4. City will provide access to water.
S. City will provide a designated area to park.
6. City will designate plant refuse piles.
7. City will do an annual user survey to determine satisfaction with their experience.
8. Complaints, policies and mediations will be addressed by the community garden subcommittee
with the City of Edina having the final authority. City of Edina does not assume responsibility of
acts of vandalism or loss of crops due to thefts.
REGULATIONS
General Rules
I. Priority for plots is given to Edina residents. If plots remain, they will be made available on a
first-come, first -serve basis.
2. Each person must apply each year for a plot. Returning gardeners will be given first preference
and permitted to keep the same plot if they wish.
3. Plots are non -transferable. Fees are non-refundable.
4. If you must abandon your plot, please inform the city so it may be re -assigned. If there is no
evidence of activity at your plot by June 3, it will be re -assigned. If you are unable to meet this
deadline, contact the City of Edina. There will be no refunds on fees paid.
5. Plots are intended for personal use only. Gardening for commercial purposes is prohibited.
6. Gardeners are responsible for planting, weeding, and watering. Harvest produce from your
designated plot only.
7. Gardeners are responsible for bringing their own tools. Storage is not provided.
8. Water source is available on site; you will be required to bring your own bucket. Hoses will be
provided.
9. Stakes that mark your plot's corners and have your plot name and number must be left in place
all season.
10. There will be trash and recycling receptacles on site.
11. A compost bin will be available for your use.
12. Please park in designated parking areas only.
13. Pets are not allowed in the garden area.
14. Insecticides or herbicides may not be used in order to create and nurture healthy soil and a
healthy plant environment in the garden.
15. Gardener will not plant illegal drugs or any invasive plants.
16. Tobacco or alcoholic beverages are not allowed in Yorktown Park.
Planting Rules
I. Only seasonal (annual) plants may be planted. No perennials, shrubs or trees are allowed to be
planted.
2. No individual temporary fencing is allowed. No permanent structures or other decorative items
are allowed.
3. Bio -degradable mulch such as compost, leaves, straw and hay are encouraged.
4. Please keep weeds to a minimum.
5. All weeds, cutting and other debris must be removed before becoming a nuisance. Please place
these items in the designated area.
6. A walkway must be maintained around each garden plot. Crops, plants, vines, vegetation and
weeds must be contained within boundaries of your garden plot. Overlapping on to adjacent
pathways or garden plots is prohibited.
7. Anyone not tending his/her plot may risk losing their garden privileges for the year.
8. Non-organic waste (cans, bottles and plastic containers) should be placed in the trash/receptacle
barrels provided.
Please Note: All rules are subject to change
CONTACT INFORMATION
Edina Parks & Recreation Department
4801 W. 50th St.
Edina, MN 55424
(P) 952-826-0367
Waiver to the City of Edina
In consideration of your acceptance of me or my child as a participant in the Community Garden program, I hereby waive all claims against the
City of Edina, its elected officials, employees and its agents, and I release the City of Edina, its elected officials, employees and its agents from all
claims for all injuries suffered by me or my child incidental to, connected with, or arising out of our participation in the Community Garden
activities for which my child or I am enrolled, including injuries suffered as the result of negligence by the City of Edina or its employees or
agents, but not including injuries suffered as a result of their willful or intentional misconduct or gross negligence,
give my approval to my child's participation in the Community Garden program during the current season. I understand that the program for
which I have enrolled or given my child permission to participate in, may be hazardous and that injuries may occur in the normal course of
participation. I assume all risks and hazards incidental to my child's or my participation, including transportation to and from the activities. I also
understand and acknowledge that the City of Edina has no medical or health insurance covering me or my child.
I understand that Parks and Recreation Department staff or their representatives may photograph participants enrolled in programs, classes or
events or enjoying park facilities, These photographs become the sole property of the city and are for Parks and Recreation Department
I also understand that the information I have provided will be made available only to program staff, the City of Edina's insurer and attorney and
volunteers connected with the program, for the purposes of administering the activity and providing parents and children with Information
regarding scheduling and scheduling changes.
Participant Name:
Participant Signature:
Date:
COMMUNITY GARDEN PROJECT
TENTATIVE TIMELINE
Rules and Policies
February 1
Location and Parking
February 8
Park Board Approval
February 12
(Rules and Policies)
Soil Testing
February 15
Garden Design/Site Map
February 15
Public Hearing Packet
February 18
Application Form
February 28
Budget Completed
February 28
Park Board Public Hearing
March 12
Park Board Review and Comment on Garden Proposal
Public Hearing
City Council Approval
April 2
Open Registration Edina Residents
April 4
Plant Bed Construction
April 8
Water Source and Garden Fence
May 3
Grand Opening
Week of May 13th
To: PARK BOARD
From: Ann Kattreh, Director
Parks & Recreation Department
Date: February 12, 2013
Subject: Yorktown Park Pilot Community Garden Parking
Agenda Item #: A. C.
Action ❑
Discussion M
Information ❑
Action Requested:
Staff asks the Park Board to discuss their interest in adding a 30 — 40 stall parking lot at
Yorktown Park. This parking lot would be funded entirely by the YMCA and would be a shared
use lot for the YMCA and the City of Edina.
Information / Background:
After the January Park Board meeting staff met with Greg Hanks, YMCA District Executive
Director to discuss partnership options with the YMCA on the Yorktown Park Community
Garden. We specifically requested the use of their parking lot and restrooms for community
garden participants. Programming and educational partnerships were also discussed. Mr. Hanks
asked if the City would consider a partnership for a parking lot on City of Edina property at
Yorktown Park. The YMCA has a significant parking problem, with their front lot being
undersized for the needs of their members many times during the day. Mr. Hanks is concerned
about allowing more users of their parking lot, when they already have significant issues with
parking. He asked if the City would consider a partnership in which we provide the land and
they pay to build and maintain a parking lot.
have attached a very rough diagram of where a parking lot would be located. This has
interesting potential for our park. We currently have no parking at this park, which certainly
limits its use. Also, this parking lot could serve as a trail head for the proposed Nine Mile Creek
Regional Trail, which will run on the northern border of the park.
This proposal significantly alters a portion of this park. It also adds a non -permeable surface in
our Park and in close proximity to a storm water retention pond in neighboring Richfield's
Adams Hill Park. Watershed District approval would be required.
If the Park Board determines potential interest in this option, staff would work with the City
Engineering Department to develop a site plan and Watershed District plan and work. with the
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
REPORT / RECOMMENDATION
YMCA to develop a formal proposal. Staff would then do a mailing to residents living within
1000 feet of the proposed gardens at Yorktown Park and the Park Board would hold a Public
Hearing on March 12`h, 2013. If recommended by the Park Board, City Council approval would
be sought for the entire project on April 2nd, 2013.
Staff considered the Durham Apartments as another parking option for the Yorktown
Community Gardens. Durham management stated that they will be doing some construction
this summer and the parking lot will be utilized for that project. They also expressed concern
that they have capacity issues as well and would be hesitant to enter into a shared use
agreement. Another drawback to this option is that it is further removed from the Community
Garden and participants would be required to haul tools and supplies across the Nine Mile
Regional Trail in order to get to the garden plots.
If the Park Board is not interested in pursuing a new parking lot at Yorktown Park, staff will
pursue shared use of the YMCA parking lot and the rest of the community garden schedule
would proceed as previously stated.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Yorktown Park DRAFT Site Plan
Page 2
41�
i Durham
Parking
_
s
w .
r
. >
i
plr.
ti
- < a
- � n
LL
i
i
;Parkingor
r e� '�s `' Wlth
walkway:_
K hr'
V Yj Y
' rr
FFf!
¢ ;���..��a f.44 ' .. •. --
If4 0 ASI
±' c� 7355
0I i
*Parking Lot—red box -40 stalls max.
*Garden Plot -4 garden rows, each 10' wide; 3' between rows; 3-4' around perimeter.
*Garden will be surrounded by black vinyl coated fencing -
*There is a pathway not shown on this 2009 Logis Map. It follows the east edge of the
skate park. Also, the walkway on the north edge has been widened and improved with
Promenade construction.
Gardens = approximately 185' X 75'. We will need space for a water buffalo container.
To: PARK BOARD
From: Ann Kattreh, Director
Parks & Recreation Department
Date: February 12, 2013
Subject: 2013 Park Board Work Plan Schedule
o e
fit-" s110
�• ��mflrolinTF"
Itiflfl
Agenda Item #: VI. D.
Action 0
Discussion El
Information O
Action Requested:
Staff requests that the Park Board approve the 2013 Park Board Work Plan Schedule.
Information / Background:
At the January 8`h, 2013 Park Board Meeting the Park Board requested that staff prepare a
schedule for the 2013 Park Board Work Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. 2013 Park Board Work Plan Schedule
City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424
2013 Park Board Work Plan Schedule
Initiative
Start Date
Target Completion
Date
Strategic Planning with a comprehensive needs assessment
March 2013
Ongoing
Comments: March - Review mission, Edina 20/20, discuss internal and
external environment, stakeholder analysis and RFP; April - Review and
approve RFP and discuss needs assessment; May - Select consultant;
July/August - Review needs assessment results; July - Board retreat
to identify Edina Parks & Recreation strategic issues.
Recommend cost recovery goals for enterprise facilities - work group
June 2013
June 2014
Review and comment on Garden Park baseball field renovations
February 2013
October 2013
Comments: April - Review and Comment; May - Council Approval;
August - Construction
Review and comment on Lake Edina Pathway
April 2013
July 2013
Comments: April - Public Hearing; May - Council Approval
Review and comment on Countryside Park master plan
December 2012
October 2013
Comments: February - bidding; March - contracts awarded;
March or early April - construction will begin
Review and comment on community garden pilot project and related policy
January 2013
May 2013
Comments: February - Rules and Policies approval;
March - Public Hearing; April - Council Approval and Construction
Senior Center Study - work group
June 2013
December 2013
To: PARK BOARD
From: Ann Kattreh, Director
Parks & Recreation Department
Date: February 12, 2013
Subject: Monarch Way Station at Arneson Acres Park
Agenda Item #: VI. E.
Action
Discussion ❑
Information ❑
Action Requested:
Staff requests approval of the addition of a Monarch Way Station at Arneson Acres Park
Information / Background:
Garden club `Late Bloomers' proposes to plan, plant, maintain and fund a Monarch Way Station
at Arneson Acres Park. City Horticulturalist Tim Zimmerman selected the site in an open area
located east of the Formal Gardens in the middle of the park. The site will be approximately
150 square feet and meets all the requirements of the National Monarch Society. When the
garden is approved and registered, the City will receive a sign and be given national recognition.
This garden will be a big draw to nature lovers, school kids and families with young children. It is
a prairie type garden and the site has access to water, if needed. The garden will be filled with as
many native plants as possible. There will be some annuals and non-native species that attract
butterflies and birds. It will include a lot of nectar plants.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Monarch Garden location at Arneson Acres Park
B. January 7"', 2013 Edina Garden Council Meeting Minutes regarding this item
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
eu. +t`1
�a 6 . , N
�� Arneson Acres Park W+E
�yF'�.r� S
January 7, 2013 Edina Garden Council Meeting
Late Bloomers Monarch Way Station Proposal to the Edina Garden Council: Presented by Betty
Workinger
The site location is located east of the Formal Gardens in the middle of the Park. City Horticultura list,
Tim Zimmerman, propose a site location in an open area. Garden club 'Late Bloomers', wants to plan,
plant and maintain and fund a Monarch Way Station in the propose area at Arneson's Acre Park. It will
be approximately 150 square feet. And meets all the requirements of the National Monarch Society, and
when approved and registered, will have a sign and be given national recognition. It will be a big draw to
nature lovers, school kids and families with young children. It is a prairie type garden and the site has
access to water if needed. The garden will be filled with as many native plants as possible. There will be
some annuals and nonnative species that attract butterflies and birds. Will include a lot of nectar plants.
Motion: The Edina Garden Council made a motion to approve The Monarch way Station site at
Arneson's Acres Park, but if not maintained by the Edina Garden Council, then the Parks and Rec.
Department can notify and decide what to do with the butterfly garden. The motion was approved.