The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011-03-08 Park Board Packet• c IA. con • I�colt tars AGENDA Regular Meeting of the Edina Park Board Tuesday, March 8, 2011, 7:00 P.M. Edina City Hall Council Chambers 4801 West 50t' Street PARK BOARD MEETING PROCEDURES During "Public Hearings, " the Chair will ask for public comment after City staff members make their presentations. If you wish to speak on the topic, you are welcome to do so as long as your comments are relevant to the discussion. To ensure fairness to all speakers and to allow the efficient conduct of a public hearing, speakers must observe the following guidelines: •Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes or less. The Chair will modify presentation times, as deemed necessary. *Try not to repeat remarks or points of view made by prior speakers and limit comments to the matter under consideration. •In order to maintain a comfortable environment for all those in attendance, the use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. *The Park Board Chairman shall decide whether or not to allow the public to speak about an agenda item that is not considered a Public Hearing. If the Chairman allows the public to speak individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes or less. Individuals should not expect the Park Board to respond to their comments. Instead, the Park Board might direct the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. PARK BOARD AGENDA I. WELCOME NEW PARK BOARD MEMBER DAVID DEEDS II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES * Tuesday, January 11, 2010 Park Board Meeting. III. NEW BUSINESS A. *Chowen Park Playground Equipment B. On -Camera Meetings vs. Off -Camera Meetings C. Recap of February 1, 2011 Work Session with City Council (action plan) 1. Veterans Memorial Future Maintenance Expenses 2. Facility User Fee Per Participant 3. The Future of Edinborough Park and Centennial Lakes Park 4. Naming of Parks and Facilities Policy IV. OLD BUSINESS A. *Braemar Golf Course Clubhouse Consultant. V. PUBLIC COMMENTS During "Public Comments, " the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about something not on the agenda. Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes or less and cannot speak to an issue for which a public hearing was previously held and closed or a matter scheduled for a future hearing. Individuals should not expect the Park Board to respond to their comments. Instead, the Park Board might direct the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VI. UPDATES FROM STAFF (information only — no action requested) VII. ELECTION OF OFFICERS A. *Election of Chairman. B. *Election of Vice Chairman. VIII. PARK BOARD COMMENTS IX. * 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 else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. * These are agenda items that require or request Park Board action. o( Le, • r��bR as Tom/ Memo To: Edina Park Board From: John Keprios, Direcr Edina Park and Recreat on Department Date: March 4, 2011 Re: TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2011, PARK BOARD MEETING STAFF REPORT. Enclosed you should find the following items: 1. Tuesday, January 11, 2011, Park Board Meeting Minutes. 2. Tuesday, March 8, 2011 Agenda. 3. Minutes from February 1, 2011 City Council Work Session. 4. Chowen Park Playground Equipment Plan. 5. November 19, 2010 Letter to Jenny Corniea. 6. January 28, 2011 Letter of Invitation to Open House Meeting. • 7. Committee Notes From Meetings Held on December 3, 16 and 30, 2010. 8. Notes from Open House Held February 16, 2011. 9. February 17, 2011 Email from Wayne Yarmoska. 10. February 17, 2011 Email from Matt Dubbe. 11. February 17, 2011 Email from Courtney Whited. 12. February 18, 2011 Email from Angela Gadtke. 13. February 18, 2011 Email from Matt Dubbe. 14. February 22, 2011 Email from Angela Gadtke. 15. March 2, 2011 Email from Matt Dubbee. 16. March 2, 2011 Email from Jack and Lynne Sullivan. 17. Email from City Manager Scott Neal. 18. Golf Course Consultant Request For Proposal. The following is the monthly Staff Report concerning each item on the agenda with the exception of Approval of the Minutes, Public Comment and Park Board Comment. PARK BOARD MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS EDINA CITY HALL 4801 WEST SO STREET The Tuesday, March 8, 2011, Park Board meeting will be at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council ® Chambers at Edina City Hall. If you are unable to attend, please contact either Office Page 1 of 7 Coordinator, Janet Canton, at 952-826-0435 JCanton@ci.edina.mn.us or me at 952-826-0430 JKeprios@ci.edina.mn.us. . I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES * Tuesday, January 11, 2011 Park Board Meeting II. NEW BUSINESS A. *Chowen Park Playground Equipment The Edina Park Board recommended and the City Council approved $120,000 for replacing playground equipment at Chowen Park in 2011. For the past several years, I have directed Assistant Director Ed MacHolda to work with neighbors to create a preferred plan for playground equipment replacements. With Ed's extensive background in playground equipment design he has done a wonderful job working closely with neighborhood residents to find equipment designs that meet their expectations which vary from one neighborhood to the next. This year we attempted a new approach to the playground equipment design and approval process. In the past, staff typically found two or three neighborhood residents to serve as a small working committee to research playground equipment through site visits and catalogs and provide staff with suggestions for the playground equipment design. That process also included the committee attending presentations from playground equipment vendors. The small committee of neighborhood residents is encouraged to share their preferred equipment and design with their neighbors. Once a preferred equipment and design were selected that was within budget, staff would work with the vendor who provides the preferred style of equipment to provide specifications for bidding the project. The lowest responsible bidder is recommended by staff to the City Council for approval. This year I directed Ed MacHolda to again work with a small committee; however, the committee's preferred plan was shared in an Open House setting at City Hall. The two neighborhood residents who volunteered to serve as the working committee were Matt Dubbe and Jennifer Corniea. On Friday, January 28, 2011, we mailed letters to all households within 1,000 feet of Chowen Park (333 households) inviting them to the Open House scheduled for Wednesday, February 16, 2011. Ed MacHolda, the committee members and the vendor from Game Time were also present at the Open House. A copy of the Open House letter is enclosed. After the Open House, Ed worked closely with his two -member committee and another resident who showed a strong interest in the plan to make revisions based on the input from the Open House. The representative from Game Time was very cooperative in making adjustments to the plan as requested by staff. After three revisions to the final plan that were made in response to those who chose to remain actively involved in the process, we received an email from Edina residents of the Chowen Park neighborhood Jack and Lynne Sullivan. A copy of that email is enclosed. 0 Page 2 of 7 This year I thought I would include the Park Board in the decision-making process in case there are strong opposing view(s) of the final plan that is generated through this • more comprehensive community input process. As with most public park improvement projects, it is rare to find a plan and/or a process that pleases everyone. Our main goal in choosing a playground equipment design is to have it reflect the expressed needs, desires and expectations of neighboring residents through a democratically fair, open and transparent process. It is staff s duty to ensure that the final design is within budget, that the plan is safe, is a good value for the community, that it meets ADA requirements and that it is properly sized for that size park and located properly within the park. Through that process, there are rarely two plans that are identical; however, there clearly are many similar pieces in each plan such as swings, slides and some type of climber. There will likely be residents of the Chowen Park neighborhood in the audience to speak both for and against this proposed playground equipment plan. I would recommend that these residents be permitted an opportunity to be heard at the Park Board meeting. This item has not been publicized as a Public Hearing and therefore the Chairman has the discretion whether or not to permit the public to speak to this agenda item at the meeting. As Park Director, I must admit that I intervened in the process when the committee's initial design was proposed. I demanded that the size of the structure (even though it was within budget) had to be reduced to better fit the character of this one acre park. • The plan was altered to a smaller footprint; however, it is admittedly still slightly larger than the playground's concrete boarder that is currently in place. The current structure's footprint is outlined in a green dotted line on the enclosed playground plan. In my view, I would not recommend making the design footprint any larger than is currently proposed. I believe that Ed has done a great job working with residents who chose to be actively involved in the process to propose a very reasonable plan that should please the majority. Staff would also appreciate the Park Board's views and input as to this choice of process. Often times the process becomes equally or more important than the end product itself. If there is a better public process approach to the design and purchasing process for playground equipment, we would appreciate the constructive feedback. Formal Park Board action is requested on this agenda item. B. On -Camera Meetings vs. Off -Camera Meetings City Manager Scott Neal is asking all Boards and Commissions to provide input on the topic of the filming and broadcasting of Board and Commission meetings. As shown in the enclosed letter from Scott Neal, he asks for feedback on: 0 Page 3 of 7 1. Do you believe that filming your Commission meeting, and subsequently rebroadcasting the filmed meeting on cable television, would • change the manner in which commissioners or guests behave or participate in your Commission meetings? 2. Do you believe there are circumstances where filming and rebroadcasting your Commission meetings would not be in the public interest? If so, what would be an example of such a circumstance? 3. Do you believe that filming and rebroadcasting your Commission meetings is an important tool in communicating your Commission's activities and discussions with the public? 4. Do you have any other input that you would like me or the Council to consider when forming a policy on this subject? We have learned that the practice in other communities varies. For example, one community films and broadcasts only a select number of Park Board meetings which occur only when the agenda includes items that involves park development or park renovation. Work sessions involving just one board or commission are defined as singular topic special work session meetings; whereas, multiple agenda item meetings are defined as meetings and not a work session. We ask that the Park Board discuss this topic and provide feedback on this important subject; however, we are not requesting a formal vote on any proposed action. • Park Board dialogue and input is requested on this agenda item. C. Recap of February 1, 2011 Work Session with City Council (action plan) At the February 1, 2011 work session with the City Council, the Park Board and City Council discussed the following important issues that were determined to be important issues to place on future Park Board agendas for further study and recommendations. 1. Veterans Memorial Future Maintenance Expenses 2. Facility User Fee Per Participant 3. The Future of Edinborough Park and Centennial Lakes Park 4. Naming of Parks and Facilities Policy Chairman Joseph Hulbert asked that these be placed on the Park Board agenda to briefly discuss and prioritize which ones should be handled first, second and so on. I ask that the Park Board prioritize the above four important issues, which will establish an action plan and discuss what background information and other related research that would be preferred to allow Park Board members to make informed decisions. The Golf Course Consultant issue was also discussed at the Joint Work Session and that issue is on this meeting's agenda for formal action. 0 Page 4 of 7 No formal action is requested on this agenda item at this time. 0 III. OLD BUSINESS A. *Braemar Golf Course Clubhouse Consultant. At the February 1, 2011 City Council Work Session (Minutes enclosed) with the Park Board, the Council agreed that we should pursue the hiring of a professional private Golf Course Consultant and directed staff to draft a Request for Proposal for the Park Board's review. The Council also stated that the Park Board's proposed Task Force concept not be pursued at this time. Enclosed is a draft copy of a Request for Proposal (RFP) that can be sent to Golf Course Consulting firms. The list of items to be studied is taken directly from a list forwarded to me from City Manager Scott Neal who received it from Chairman Joseph Hulbert. The added questions mentioned in the RFP are those additional topics suggested by Park Board members earlier in the process. Once Park Board approves the RFP, I intend to personally contact those vendors who have already submitted written proposals and explain the situation. By law, any individual or organization may submit a proposal. We legally may not deny them that opportunity; however, as stated in the RFP we do reserve the right to select a consulting firm based on which one appears to offer the best value to the City of Edina and not necessarily the lowest bid. • The professional consulting firms that I propose we send and RFP currently are: • National Golf Foundation; Jupiter, FL • Sirius Golf Advisors LLC; Jacksonville, FL • Continental Golf Corporation; Woodbury, MN • Effective Golf Course Systems; Edina, MN • Wexford Golf, Minneapolis MN • The Golf Course Consulting Group; Columbus, OH • Golf Property Analysts; New Cumberland, PA • Golf Convergence; Castle Rock, CO • THK Associates; Castle Rock, CO • Global Golf Advisors; Phoenix, AZ After proposals are received and analyzed, the Park Board reserves the right to interview one or more consultants before making a final decision. I would recommend that two Park Board members volunteer to meet with staff to review the written proposals before making a recommendation to the Park Board for formal action. All Park Board members will receive copies of all written proposals. Formal Park Board action is requested on this agenda item. ® Page 5 of 7 IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS During "Public Comments, " the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about something not on the agenda. Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes or less and cannot speak to an issue for which a public hearing was previously held and closed or a matter scheduled for a future hearing. Individuals should not expect the Park Board to respond to their comments. Instead, the Park Board might direct the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. V. UPDATES FROM STAFF (information only — no action requested) Staff will provide a verbal update on other Park and Recreation Department matters of interest to the Park Board that are not on the agenda and do not require any formal action. VI. ELECTION OF OFFICERS A. * Election of Chairman. B. * Election of Vice Chairman. In March or April of each year, the Park Board self -elects a Chairman and Vice Chairman. I will request nominations from the Park Board for Chairman. If there is more than one nomination, Janet Canton will pass around paper ballots for Park Board members to vote for their choice of Chairperson. The same process will then be used to elect a Vice Chairman. In the case of a tie, nominations for that position will reopen and the process will start over until a Chairman and Vice Chairman are chosen. • The main duties of the Chairman are: 1. To work with staff in establishing an agenda prior to each meeting. 2. Chair the process of each Park Board meeting. (In other words, the Chairman provides leadership that keeps Park Board meetings orderly, democratic and encourages input from all Park Board members and guests). 3. Serve as spokesperson for the Park Board at City Council meetings and other public functions. 4. Assign Park Board related duties to Park Board members. 5. Assist the City Council with the interviewing applicants who were interested in serving on the Park Board. The Vice Chairman is to carry out the duties of the Chairman in the absence of the Park Board Chairman. In accordance with City Code, a member may serve a maximum of two consecutive years as Chairman. Park Board action is requested on this agenda item. VII. PARK BOARD COMMENTS 0 Page 6 of 7 This is the opportunity for Park Board members to provide comments on park and recreation related matters not on the regular agenda. • VIII. *ADJOURNMENT • 0 Page 7 of 7 • Minutes of the Edina Park Board January 11, 2011 Edina City Hall, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Lough, Todd Fronek, Ellen Jones, Jennifer Kenney, Joseph Hulbert, Louise Segreto, Dan Peterson, Rob Presthus, Keeya Steel MEMBERS ABSENT: Randy Meyer, Felix Pronove, Austin Dummer STAFF PRESENT: John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Louise Segreto MOVED TO APPROVE THE DECEMBER 14, 2010 PARK BOARD MINUTES. Jennifer Kenney SECONDED THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED. II. NEW BUSINESS A. Braemar Golf Course Clubhouse Consultant - Mr. Hulbert proposed to the Park Board that they submit a recommendation to the City Council that they utilize the services of an independent consultant to help put together a vision for Braemar Park. He explained that he would like to see it cover items listed on pages one through seven of NGF's • proposal. He added he would also like to see a customer survey done which he thinks would be beneficial for marketing and feedback to course management. Mr. Hulbert pointed out that during the last three years the clubhouse has lost $470,000. He noted that he realizes $15,000 to $20,000 is a lot to pay for a consultant and as the City Finance Director said at their November meeting this amount of money will not make a difference one way or another on a multi-million dollar facility like Braemar especially if it's going to add value over the next several years. Mr. Hulbert stated that as far as a consultant he thinks it's important that the consultant not be in competition with Braemar. In addition, he doesn't think they should be in the business of facilitating the sale or taking over the management of a golf course and doesn't think they should be affiliated past or present with the course or its management; however, they should have extensive experience in the field. Mr. Hulbert indicated that Mr. Keprios did contact a local consultant "Continental Golf Corporation", and included in the Park Board packet is a letter from their president David Mooty. He stated that after researching it, it just didn't feel like it was the right fit. Mr. Hulbert noted that he contacted the "United States Golf Association" to try to find a reputable lead to put him in touch with. He commented he was given the name of a group in Wisconsin; however, they only work in turf management and maintenance operations but suggested he contact the National Golf Foundation which he already had. • Ms. Steel apologized for not being at the last Park Board meeting but noted that she did watch it online. She indicated she liked the comparison to the Pamela Park and Countryside Park long-term plans that have been done in the past; however, this has a business component to it and they need to look at the operational aspects. She pointed out that she also thinks they need to look at the community input aspect and would like to entertain the idea of putting together a task force like they have done in the past for Pamela Park and the Veterans Memorial. Ms. Steel explained that she put together a handout and that the purpose of the task force would be to come together before the consultant came to Edina so that they could discuss what their concerns and questions would be for the consultant. Ms. Steel stated that Mr. Hulbert and she were able to talk to NGF and they do take community input as part of their report which would be valuable. She commented that more importantly the task force would be completing an evaluation of the report and will then present an action plan to the Park Board. She indicated that she thinks this follows the precedent that the Park Board has set in the past and allows for community input from those who would be interested in being involved in this process. Mr. Segreto indicated that she thinks combining a task force and an outside independent consultant would really give them the best of both worlds in terms of getting local input and a breath of fresh air. Mr. Lough stated that he thinks systemic losses by golf operations in total over time • should be unacceptable to city management and to the City Council. He noted that if what they are trying to do is take a look at forecasts, which are continuing to project losses, then if the City Council wishes the Park Board to take a look at ways in which they can stop an enterprise operation from systemically losing money that he thinks they would have some sort of charter for them to do that. He asked who is it now that looks in detail at an enterprise operation to try to assure the city and community that something that was not meant to be subsidized per se by other sources of revenue is indeed on the road to becoming healthy. He stated that if they think it would be useful to have a consultant then they can make that recommendation to the City Council; however, he hasn't gone into enough detail to understand the plans from the management themselves as to what it is they are trying to do to correct the situation. He indicated that a consultant is going to do a long laundry list of one year, two year, three year operating plans and make detailed recommendations about pluses and minuses that can be done now and in the near future. Mr. Lough commented that his own personal experience is that the amounts of money that they are talking about are fairly modest; however, any amount of money that they might spend on something like this should probably be approved by the City Council even if they have local authority to do so for less than $20,000. • Mr. Peterson indicated that every municipal golf operation have the same thing on their agenda. He noted that a lot of it is the economy and added that private clubs are going downhill and cutting staff. He stated that he thinks they have good management at 2 Braemar and they are lucky to have them. He indicated that one thing he would like a consultant and task force to look at is should we continue to have two dedicated executive or par three courses, is one enough. Secondly, can they continue to afford 27 holes for the regulation course? It costs a lot of money and maybe they could save staff and maintenance costs if they only need 18 holes, at least until the economy improves. Mr. Fronek indicated that he agrees with Mr. Peterson and he doesn't think this whole process has ever been an indictment of current or former management, Braemar has run great for 40 plus years of its existence. He noted that Braemar is a great jewel in the middle of their city and they provide a great service to their residents. However, he does not want to wait until Braemar becomes a crisis. Mr. Fronek pointed out that he thinks now is probably the time to look at Braemar and decide what they want to do in terms of a 10 or 15 year plan and thinks a consultant is going to be a good first step in starting to formulate that process. Ms. Jones stated that she agrees they may want to consider creating a task force but her concern is that they lose sight of the big vision. She noted they have this wonderful golf course but according to the 15 year plan they are going to have to invest over three million dollars to which the majority will go towards maintenance. She indicated that she has no idea how they would be able to fund that and doesn't know what the priorities are. Ms. Jones stated that she does think that if they seek help for how they can go about budgeting for it they could help them with that. She commented that she does want community involvement, especially the people involved in the Braemar Golf • Club. She noted that she wants them to remain involved and doesn't want them to feel alienated by hiring a consultant. She added that she also doesn't want them to waste their money on a consultant going down paths the community doesn't want so therefore the idea of identifying what they want the task force to look at can save them money. Mr. Presthus indicated that isn't the general purpose of what they are doing on this right now is to try to find ways to get more revenue at the golf course. He commented as Mr. Fronek pointed out Braemar has been successful for 40 plus years and compared to most public courses it's very successful but now they are in an economic downturn. He indicated that he likes the idea of a task force and based on the information they received from Mr. Mooty he thinks they should combine the two as a first step rather than pay $15,000 to $20,000 on a consultant. He noted that maybe they don't want to use Mr. Mooty but he is trying to expand on the task force and maybe they should appoint the task force to work with Braemar staff and focus on their revenue enhancement side rather than the big picture items to start. Mr. Hulbert stated that his original thought was to have an A to Z evaluation of the course and stated that he doesn't see why they can't go with both NGF & Mr. Mooty. He indicated that it takes a little time to build up momentum and try to get something accomplished. He noted it was his intent from the beginning why look at half the operation when you can look at the entire operation. is Ms. Segreto asked in terms of the notification requirements to form a task force is there a requisite notice period that would slow the process down. Mr. Keprios replied he 3 believes you can form a task force on your own and that you don't need to rely on City Council to do that. He noted that he would recommend that staff be added to the task force. Mr. Hulbert commented that he could see it being valuable to have staff present at the meetings and help direct thoughts and ideas. Joseph Hulbert MOVED THAT PARK BOARD SUBMIT A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL THAT WE UTILIZE THE SERVICES OF AN INDEPENDENT GOLF CONSULTANT ALONG WITH THE PROPOSED TASK FORCE. Todd Fronek SECONDED THE MOTION. Mr. Fronek stated that to clarify Ms. Steel's "Proposed Task Force Composition" the purpose of the task force is in part to determine the scope of the consultant and he asked Ms. Steel to comment on the scope of the task force. Ms. Steel explained that first she wanted to make sure the Park Board was in agreement with the composition of the Task Force. She noted that secondly she thought the Park Board could come to some agreement on that part and then go ahead with the motion. Mr. Hulbert asked Ms. Steel how she thinks the task force would operate in its roles and responsibilities. Ms. Steel replied instead of making a motion first she wanted to have more discussion. Ms. Steel apologized to Mr. Keprios for not including staff in the task force. • Ms. Segreto agreed staff should be a part of the task force and asked how many staff members would be appropriate. Mr. Fronek replied he thinks Todd Anderson, Manager of Braemar, should be part of the task force. Ms. Segreto stated that her concern is that it not be too large that it becomes cumbersome and suggested having a total of ten people on the task force. Ms. Jones stated that for the Small Site Task Force she was on there were 20 plus people on it and she felt it functioned well as an open type of body; they did not turn anyone away who was interested in being involved. Ms. Segreto responded that she is in favor of keeping it as small as they can and that ten members would be good. In addition, she agrees Mr. Anderson should be added as the staff representative. Ms. Jones asked if they should discuss the immediate timeline they are thinking. Mr. Keprios replied that a task force by definition is a short-term working committee, it's not an ongoing commission or board and the life expectancy is until the end of the project, however long that takes. He stated that he thinks it's a little premature to determine how long it needs to be in existence but he would think they would want to have them stick around until the consultant has done what the task force wants them to do since that appears to be the purpose of it. Also he would think the task force would stick around until the results of the study and the recommendations of the consultants are complete and presentations are delivered to Park Board and City Council and at that time the task force job would be done. Mr. Keprios commented that he doesn't think there needs to have a definitive ending date. Ms. Steel asked can they determine when they begin meeting to which Mr. Keprios replied as soon as the task force can be assembled they can start meeting. 4 Mr. Hulbert clarified that Mr. Keprios will be part of the task force as a staff liaison to which Mr. Keprios replied he would be happy to be on the task force. Mr. Hulbert indicated if this goes to the City Council and they agree he would like for the consultant to do a site visit when the golf course is in operational mode. He noted it would be nice to have the task force in place a month ahead of time so they are able to have one or two meetings so that they can brainstorm some ideas. Mr. Hulbert asked Ms. Steel to comment on ways she thought the task force would interact with the Park Board. Ms. Steel replied that their purpose would be to develop and present an action plan to the Park Board. She noted that Mr. Keprios could give updates to the Park Board as they go along as well there will be some Park Board members on the task force. Mr. Keprios stated that one of the challenges they may face is there may be more than one person from the clubs and association that want to be involved and who do you pick at that point because he does think there will be a lot of support and enthusiasm for it. Mr. Keprios asked Mr. Hulbert if he is recommending just a consultant or does he want a specific consultant. Mr. Hulbert responded he would like to recommend to the City Council to hire an independent consultant that has no ties or affiliation with anyone at Braemar to give an unvarnished assessment of recommendations as well as have community input and find a way to tie the two together. He noted he would like enough time to have at least a couple of meetings before the consultant begins their process so • that the task force can give their input to the consultant. Ms. Segreto commented that she's a little confused because Mr. Lough explained why he thought it would be best for this issue to be sent to the City Council with a recommendation but she thought the Park Board had authority to make a decision for expenditures that were less than $20,000. Mr. Keprios explained the Park Board has the authority to advise the City Council regardless of the dollar amount. He stated that when money is involved anything under $20,000 does not necessarily have to be brought to City Council to expedite your process. He indicated that if the Park Board wanted to save time as long as the cost is under $20,000 it becomes the City Manager's decision whether or not it needs to go to City Council for consideration and, if not, he has the authority to sign the contract. Ms. Segreto indicated that she has spent a lot of time looking at the proposals and as far as she is concerned based on the discussions they've had she would like to recommend NGF to the City Council so that they don't have to go through the lengthy process of listening to presentations because that will slow down the process. Ms. Steel stated that she is not comfortable sending a recommendation to the City Manager because she feels with Park Board being appointed by the City Council it is their duty to advise the City Council. Ms. Kenney noted that she agrees with Ms. Steel but it seems to some extent they are not in agreement on exactly how they should proceed. She pointed out that she feels 5 more comfortable with the recommendation of forming a task force, and possibly at the same time recommending to the City Council that once they receive feedback from the task force that the feedback would then be provided to the consultant to look at. She stated that she thinks it's premature right now for them to name a consultant and have the City Manager sign a contract. Mr. Keprios asked the Park Board if the City Council passes the recommendation what process would they like to use for the selection of a consultant. Mr. Hulbert replied if the City Council agrees with the recommendation and hypothetically want to put out their own Request For proposal his only request would be to include the two consultants they have already done. He stated again what's important to him is that they be independent and unaffiliated with the Braemar and provide truly an independent analysis. Mr. Keprios replied that with all due respect the Park Board did ask staff to do that but then put a stop to it and did your own research. Mr. Keprios stated that he doesn't think they should expect the City Council to decide on which consultants they are going to use or decide on the process, they will more than likely look to the Park Board to provide that. Mr. Hulbert stated that he is trying to be respectful of City Council and their decision making ability. Mr. Keprios explained that typically the ways these things work is you would request what you feel is in the best interest of the City of Edina to hire an independent consultant and would then ask staff to put together a request for proposal which would then be sent out to the Park Board to review. He indicated to Mr. Hulbert that he has already done that on his own and if that is what the Park Board is comfortable with then he is okay with that because he is here to support the Park Board and is more than happy to do the leg work that is his job. Mr. Keprios stressed that he thinks if you ask the City Council to tell you which consultants you should hire is not a good recommendation to come from the Park Board. He stated that if you want to go forward and you're not comfortable with what you currently have and you're not ready to make a decision maybe you would like for the task force to be involved in that or perhaps you want staff to send out more RFP's; however, he doesn't think Park Board should ask the City Council to give you direction on what to recommend. Mr. Presthus indicated that based on everything he's heard he would suggest that they approve the idea of putting together a task force and he likes the start of what the composition of the task force is. However, he does think there needs to be some discussion outside of this meeting to finalize what the actual composition is. He noted that he thinks they are on the right track but there are a couple of other ideas that they don't necessarily need to talk about now. He commented that they still have time to establish that and put it together because they are not hiring a consultant until the summer when the course is open. He stated that he thinks part of the point of putting the task force together will be for them to decide whether it makes sense as well as for them to use a consultant. He commented if they want to use a consultant the task force can help review that because like Mr. Keprios stated he has done a lot of this work already and if the task force is going to be involved then why don't they just approve a task force. Mr. Hulbert responded that he would like for the recommendation to include that ® we utilize the services of a consultant and if it's NGF, the one he is most comfortable with, that's what he would make a motion on. Mr. Presthus noted that what he is saying • is if they are going to make a task force they might as well empower them in that way because it's not a one person decision; otherwise don't even have a task force. Mr. Lough stated that he agrees to some point with what Mr. Presthus is saying. He noted the purpose of the task force, as Ms. Steel has written, would be to define specific concerns and questions to ask the consultant. Mr. Lough indicated that it sounds like what they need is a body to bring them together around what they are trying to figure out going forward. He stated if the consultant can answer these questions and propose solutions that they think may be helpful then at that time they could entertain the idea of going ahead and hiring a consultant and sorting out which consultants will be the best. Mr. Lough commented isn't the primary purpose of the task force to get the issues framed, the questions asked and the concerns defined. Mr. Hulbert commented that he just thinks they are looking at it from different directions and that the concept for task force is to let the consultant know what's important to the community with the golf course. Mr. Lough replied that may turn out to be the case but you have to go through that step first and we are not necessarily wedded to a consultant once they've made a list of concerns and questions but wouldn't the task force have to recommend that. Mr. Presthus asked isn't the point of bringing in an outside consultant to get a whole set of fresh eyes and we can point them in the direction with the task force. He noted that • he likes the idea of a task force but if we are telling a consultant this is what we want and building around this then they are not really coming with fresh eyes. Mr. Hulbert pointed out that he thought it was important because it's a community golf course and the community in some ways should be involved in the process to make sure they can convey their list of concerns, thoughts and ideas for the course. He noted that ultimately the consultant would be someone who would come in and give an evaluation and ideas for the course. Mr. Presthus suggested that the task force come up with their ideas and the consultant has their own ideas and then they two can collaborate together after that. Mr. Hulbert responded that he doesn't think the consultant is going to stick around and collaborate with the task force. Mr. Presthus replied no but they can take the consultant's proposal and compare it with what the task force has been saying and then the Park Board would choose the best route to go forward, they would be separate. Ms. Steel stated that as the person who came up with the idea for the task force she has talked to NGF and she would recommend NGF as their consultant in going forward in addition to the task force. She pointed out that Mr. Keprios has done a lot of work looking for different consultants and so she would not make a recommendation tonight to put that burden on the City Council to look for another consultant. She noted they have done a lot of work and NGF is a very reputable consulting firm. Mr. Fronek indicated that he doesn't think anyone doubts NGF's capabilities or what they can do. He noted as an advisory board they need to rely on staff and asked Mr. Keprios for his opinion. Mr. Keprios replied that NGF is a very qualified firm and • would probably do an outstanding job. He stated that he was sent on a charge by the Park Board to find local competition but if you really want a set of fresh eyes like you discussed he thinks an outside look from that group would be just fine and if that's the direction Park Board wants to go, he will fully support it. Mr. Fronek asked what would be the timing of signing a contract with NGF or any consultant. Mr. Keprios replied if it's recommended tonight it could be rather quick depending on the City Manager and his sense of it which he thinks he would support it. Mr. Fronek asked would they need to do it that quickly to which Mr. Keprios replied the better question would be do you want to. Mr. Keprios pointed out this is not a staff driven thing; it is not something staff brought forward. He stated that he applauds the Park Board for bringing this forward if you think it's the direction we need to go to turn things around and staff is happy to give it their best shot. Mr. Peterson asked wouldn't it make sense to get the task force going as quickly as possible and then in two to four months recommend to the City Council a consultant. He noted that he thinks there will be some good and true local citizens looking at the issues and that will still leave plenty of time for the golf season. He stated that he has a very strong belief that Braemar isn't broken, it's the economy that's currently broken and that eventually the economy will get better. He pointed out that every golf course he knows of have the same difficulties and therefore would put his stake on our fellow citizens to set the path and then look at the consultant early or mid -summer. Mr. Hulbert stated that he likes that idea and as far as timing goes maybe they could put • something in the Sun Current or on Edina Patch indicating that we are looking for people to form a task force. He noted if people are interested they could submit an application or something showing their desire to be on a task force. He indicated they could go over them at the next meeting or two and try to have something in place by March or April. He commented this way they have some time to get their legs underneath them and then try to get NGF out in June or July. Ms. Jones stated that she doesn't want to waste people's time and therefore feels if they are going to go through the City Council they should wait for their approval before they create a task force. Mr. Hulbert commented that he agrees. Ms. Steel noted that she thinks it should be a two part recommendation. Ms. Jones stated that her experience has been that neighborhoods like involvement in this type of thing. She noted there are three at large community representatives and she would like to make sure that one representative is from the neighborhood. She commented they may want to reduce it to two at large plus one neighborhood representative. Mr. Keprios reminded the Park Board that procedurally there is a motion and a second on the table to recommend to the City Council to hire a consultant and form a task force. Mr. Hulbert asked the Park Board if they would prefer there be two motions versus one motion. Ms. Kenney replied yes, she would. Mr. Keprios noted that procedurally you have a motion on the table that's been seconded. Mr. Hulbert asked if he could • withdraw his motion. Ms. Steel indicated that she's afraid to do them separately because they are hand in hand motions the task force is acting upon the consultant. Ms. Kenney 8 replied that her understanding is that the consultant is acting upon the task force. Mr. Hulbert responded he doesn't think the consultant is acting on the task force, the consultant is acting independently, and the task force is somewhat acting independently by providing ideas and things they feel are important to the consultant but are also coming back with ideas to the Park Board, golf course and City Council. Ms. Kenney stated that she doesn't think it's an accurate statement to say that the task force is acting upon the consultant's recommendations, if anything it's the opposite but regardless at a minimum they are independent and the task force is going to come up with its recommendations and the consultants are going to come up with their recommendation. She pointed out that for the last three months the motion that they have never really acted upon is as a Park Board do they agree that they want to request that the City Council hire a consultant and so she thinks that needs to be decided. Mr. Hulbert stated his motion was to use an independent consultant, not specifying one, but with the caveat of also creating a task force he would like to amend that motion and specify using NGF. Mr. Keprios replied that needs a second. Ms. Segreto SECONDED THE MOTION. Mr. Peterson asked for a time frame. Mr. Hulbert replied the timeframe would be to try to get feedback from the City Council and see if they can get it on their agenda for their next meeting. He stated that he would like for the Park Board at their next meeting to decide a course of action for putting out request for people at large that want to be a part of this task force. He indicated he would like to get a task force in place by the middle • of March or April and he would like for the consultant to look at Braemar mid-June. • Mr. Lough commented that he is of the opinion that the task force has work to do before a consultant is considered. He commented that he doesn't think they go in parallel and is not particularly favorably inclined toward recommending hiring a consultant right now. Mr. Hulbert stated that the motion on the table is to hire an independent golf consultant using NGF and implementing the utilization of a task force if possible by the middle of March or April and having NGF come out in June and give the task force two months to do their due diligence and formulate ideas. Mr. Keprios indicated that he thinks procedurally they should vote on the amendment first and if that passes then ask for a vote on the original motion. Mr. Lough asked for the original motion to be repeated RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT WE UTILIZE THE SERVICES OF AN INDEPENDENT GOLF COURSE CONSULTANT AND AT THE SAME TIME UTILIZING A TASK FORCE AS STATED IN MS. STEEL'S MEMO WITH THE ADDITION OF ONE STAFF MEMBER AND MR. KEPRIOS. The Amendment: "TO RECOMMEND NGF AS THE CONSULTANT" 0 IN FAVOR OF AMENDMENT: Todd Fronek, Keeya Steel, Joseph Hulbert, Ellen Jones, Louise Segreto AGAINST AMENDMENT: Jennifer Kenney, Dan Peterson, Bill Lough, Rob Presthus Mr. Keprios stated six votes are need to pass the amendment so AMENDMENT TO ORIGINAL MOTION FAILED. Mr. Hulbert repeated the original motion "TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY USE THE SERVICES OF AN INDEPENDENT GOLF CONSULTANT AS LISTED ON SERVICES FOR EXAMPLE ON ONE THROUGH SEVEN WITH NGF'S PROPOSAL ALONG WITH THE UTILIZATION OF A TASK FORCE IN THE TIME FRAME THEY SUGGESTED". IN FAVOR: Todd Fronek, Keeya Steel, Ellen Jones, Joseph Hulbert, Dan Peterson, Louise Segreto AGAINST — Jennifer Kenny, Bill Lough, Rob Presthus MOTION PASSED Mr. Keprios asked the Park Board what process they are envisioning for hiring a consultant assuming the City Council approves the recommendation. Mr. Hulbert • replied he is anticipating a little feedback from City Council. Mr. Presthus commented that he thinks what Mr. Keprios is saying is that we need to give the City Council a more definitive outline of what we recommend that the process should be rather than asking them for feedback because that is the Park Board's job. Mr. Keprios asked the Park Board if they are expecting the task force to make a recommendation for consultants and then have them give presentations. Mr. Hulbert asked for thoughts from the Park Board. Mr. Fronek stated that he thinks it should be staff, if staff feels that the recommendations that have come forth already are sufficient then put that in the recommendation and if not send out an RFP to a few more companies to come in and take a look. Mr. Hulbert responded that he thinks Mr. Keprios made it clear that he didn't want to do that because staff has already done the due diligence process. Mr. Keprios replied that he will be happy to do whatever it is that the Park Board would like for him to do. Ms. Segreto stated that she is really uncomfortable having the task force involved with selecting a consultant. She explained she feels what they really need is someone from outside of this community to come in and analyze Braemar. She noted that rightfully so the task force is made up of people who are very involved in the golf course and may not have an independent analysis of the selection of the consultant. Ms. Segreto indicated that she thinks the task force should help narrow what the consultant studies. She asked that any Park Board members who are uncomfortable with NGF should do whatever due diligence they think is necessary to feel comfortable in recommending to the City • Council who we should use. 10 Ms. Kenney indicated that she voted against the original motion. She stated to clarify the Park Board was first asked to vote on a specific consultant and then were asked to vote on whether they wanted to hire a consultant at all and so both of her votes were no. She stated that if it's the Park Board's majority decision that they are going to recommend hiring a consultant then she thinks it's a different question on whether they want to recommend a specific consultant. She pointed out that it may be worth making another motion since it has already been decided that they are going to recommend hiring a consultant. Mr. Presthus stated that he agrees with Ms. Kenney because he voted based on the same reasoning. He indicated that if they are going to go with a consultant then NGF makes sense because Mr. Keprios has already done due diligence. Todd Fronek MOVED TO RECOMMEND THAT THE PARK BOARD RECOMMENDS HIRING NGF AS THE CONSULTANT. Louise Segreto SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Hulbert stated that part of him feels that if they start to get into specifics of the timing of when they create a task force, aren't they kind of putting the cart ahead of the horse. He indicated that ultimately the City Council could say they don't like either of the ideas. He noted that he thinks if they can have a task force up and running by April and have NGF here in June that will give the task force two months. He stated that before they decide any of this he thinks they need to wait until they get some sort of • feedback from the City Council. Mr. Keprios explained what he would like to see happen is to bring this information to the City Council as soon as possible and see if there is any opposition. He stated that next he would recommend that they do a quick work session with the City Council and Park Board and hammer this out. He commented that he suspects they will support what you would like to do and make it successful. Mr. Hulbert suggested that maybe they turn their next Park Board meeting into a work session or possibly they could schedule something in between. Mr. Keprios responded that first he thinks he will have the City Manager discuss this with the City Council and see what their desire is from there because it will delay the process if they wait to do it in a City Council setting. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS John West, 6113 Kaymar Drive, stated that he has a couple of questions. He noted that he is a fan of Braemar Golf Course and loves Braemar and was curious as to the issue statement and the discussion about taking the issue or questions to the City Council. He asked what would be the issue statement, what is the issue they are trying to solve. He understands that Braemar Golf Course is perhaps not profitable but one question he has is how you would phrase that to the City Council and then what would you ask City Council to do and then if there was some discussion about a consultant and a task force what would be their mission statement. He asked what information would you want from this task • force or this consultant to make the appropriate decision. He noted that he heard a lot of discussion about a consultant and task force but driving down a little bit deeper what 11 information do you want from either the consultant or the task force to make a decision or recommendation to the City Council because he didn't hear a lot about that. Again he asked what is it they are trying to solve. Mr. Hulbert informed Mr. West that they don't have a practice of dialoging during the public comment portion of the agenda but assured him that those will all be things that they will be deliberating and talking about over the coming months. IV. STAFF UPDATES A. Star Tribune Article - Mr. Keprios asked the Park Board to refer to the article that was in their packet pertaining to the small triangular piece of open space designated as a park that was recently in the Star Tribune newspaper. He pointed out that one thing the article did not address that he did state was if the constituent feels that if this is still something he would like to purse then he has the option of requesting that the matter be placed on the Park Board's agenda. B. Centennial Lakes Braemar, Golf Dome - Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that they had a great Winter Festival at Centennial Lakes. He noted that Braemar Arena is now up and operational. Lastly, the golf dome was repaired in less than five days and that is back up and operational. Meeting Adjourned at 8:30 pm. • 12 • MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL FEBRUARY 1, 2011 5:05 P.M. Mayor Pro Tem Swenson called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. Answering roll call were: Members Bennett, Brindle and Mayor Pro Tem Swenson. Member Sprague entered the meeting at 5:07 p.m. Mayor Hovland entered the meeting at 5:15 p.m. Park Board Members in attendance were: Bill Lough, Keeya Steel, Randy Meyer, Ellen Jones, Daniel Peterson, Rob Presthus, Louise Segreto, Felix Pronove, Todd Fronek and Chair Joseph Hulbert. Absent were: Jennifer Kenny and Austin Dummer Staff attending the meeting included: Scott Neal, City Manager; Ceil Smith, Assistant to the City Manager; John Keprios, Park & Recreation Director, Ed Mac Holda, Assistant Park Director; and Debra Mangen, City Clerk. Mayor Pro Tem Swenson stated the purpose of the meeting was to review several issues of mutual concerns. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF BOARDS COMMISSIONS AND STAFF The • Council, Park Board and staff discussed the roles for Board Members and staff. When a large issue requiring research presents itself, Board Members are encouraged to investigate and research issues. It might be beneficial to schedule more work sessions for the entire Board. When the breadth and scope of a particular issue has been defined, staff can proceed as directed by City policy and code. VETERANS MEMORIAL FUTURE MAINTENANCE EXPENSES Concern was expressed during the discussion with potential future costs for maintenance of the memorial and capital improvements that may become necessary for the park infrastructure. Following discussion of the proposed Veterans Memorial at Utley Park, staff was directed to proceed with the design directing the architect to reduce maintenance costs in the design, to check with the watershed district regarding impact on the creek and natural areas, to provide Park Board members with copies of minutes of all Veterans Memorial Committee meetings, past and future and to post those minutes on the City website and to have the Park Board host an open house to gather citizen input as to the design and location. FACILITY USER FEE PER -PARTICIPANT (GYMS, OUTDOOR RINKS AND ATHLETIC FIELDS) The facility user fee was established by the City Council in 1987 as a means to cover a portion of the Park Maintenance budget. It began at a rate of $5.00 per participant using City gyms, outdoor rinks and athletic fields. The last increase was in 2007 when it was increased to the current level of $9.00 per participant. Director Keprios said the City Council adopted an access to facility policy that defines the relationship with the athletic • associations and the City. The Board and Council discussed whether the relationship agreement should be reviewed and whether the amount of the subsidy should be reviewed. There was a cost analysis in process that would be brought before the Park Board with any resulting recommendation coming to the City Council. BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE CONSULTANT Discussion included Park Board's recommendation regarding the hiring of a consultant to review golf course operations; staff's recommendation to allow the new manager and staff time to put their process and changes into place; and how to utilize staff expertise and Park Board expertise in the development of an RFP to analyze the entire City Golf Course Enterprise including: Braemar Golf Course, Fred Richards Golf Course and the Golf Dome. The RFP will be developed and a report will be made to Council. FUTURE OF EDINBOROUGH PARK AND CENTENNIAL LAKE PARK Discussion centered on the cost of maintenance of the facilities and how to fund that maintenance when the existing trust fund runs out of funds in four to five years. Staff was directed to attempt to separate the financials for the two entities, to evaluate what functions each park provides and see where else in the community these functions can be obtained. Council members expressed support for potential use of a consultant to study Edinborough Park. Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, • Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, February 1, 2011 James B. Hovland, Mayor 11 R K tz U Z _ U z n R 1 R cD O O m 94 \ N to N E � � o � U (V j j`N° a 000 3 u� C' r,�U c N ^ fy xCd( co 0 7z ar,LLL6 gas Doo Zz N O off= ga QOR CL ZZQ^ 66 M v C1 r3 m • November 19, 2010 Ms. Jenny Corniea 5704 Drew Ave. S. Edina, MN 55410 SUBJECT: PLAYGROUND COMMITTEE MEETING Dear Jenny: I would like to invite you to a meeting scheduled for Friday, December 3rd at 8:OOa.m. in the Mayor's Conference Room at Edina City Hall to discuss playground equipment for Chowen Park. If you are interested and able to attend I would like to ask that you make six facility visits before our meeting. The purpose of the facility visits is to allow you the opportunity to see playground equipment from six different manufacturers and thus have a better understanding of what we • may specify for Chowen Park. The six sites I would like you to visit are as follows: U Park Alden Park Big Rock Park Countryside Park McGuire Park Rosland Park York Park Address 6750 Belmore Drive North River Street & Park Ave 6240 Tracy Ave. S. 69th Street and McGuire Road 4300 West 66th Street 5448 York Ave. S. Manufacturers Gametime (Delano) Landscape Structures Kompan Little Tikes Pipeline Timberform When looking at the different sites please make note of the different play components and safety surface materials, which you think we should specify for Chowen Park. Also, please note the materials used i.e. aluminum, wood, compressed wood or recycled plastic. I look forward to meeting with you on Friday, December 3`d. If you have any questions please give me a call at 952-826-0431. Sincerely, Ed MacHolda Park & Recreation Assistant Director • January 28, 2011 Dear Resident Neighbor of Chowen Park: I would like to invite you to an Open House scheduled for Wednesday, February 16th at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Edina City Hall to view and discuss the proposed playground equipment replacement plan for Chowen Park. The current playground equipment at Chowen Park was purchased and installed 20 years ago and no longer meets the current ADA or safety guidelines. I have worked closely with neighborhood residents Matt Dubbe and Jenny Corniea and two playground manufacturers to come up with a very nice replacement plan. • If, after reviewing and discussing the plan on Wednesday, February 16th the neighborhood agrees with the neighborhood committee, the proposed plan will be placed on the Park Board's March 8th, 2011 agenda for their approval. If approved by Park Board, I will advertise and bid the proposal with a planned starting construction date of late May. If, however, we need more time to perfect the plan, we'll take it to the Park Board once we've made those revisions. We do plan on having the chosen playground manufacturer present to assist us on any specific questions. Your input in the process is valued and greatly appreciated. I look forward to meeting you on Wednesday, February 16th at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Edina City Hall. If you have any questions I can be reached at 952-826-0431 or emacholda@ci.edina.mn.us. Thank you! Sincerely, Ed MacHolda, Assistant Director Park and Recreation Department 0 . Chowen Park Playground Committee Notes Friday, December 3, 2010 General Comments/Questions: • It feels like the Park has lost some of its greenery can we add trees or shrubbery? Yes, we can look at including trees or shrubs to our plan. • Can we look at the playfield? Yes, we can look at replacing a backstop or skinning a simple base path or infield. • Can we get recycling cans? Yes, we can look at including recyclable cans if the one year trial goes well at Pamela Park and Lewis Park. • Can we donate the old playground equipment? Unfortunately, we cannot donate the old playground equipment. It would actually be more expensive to remove without trying to damage it, research with our insurance company and legal representation. Field Trip Comments: • Loved Alden Park except the color combination. • • Love Rosland Park especially the metal slides and the tot separation. They also wondered whether or not they could specify more than one vendor. • Liked McGuire Park but, wouldn't recommend the shade structure or the color combination. As far as the safety surface goes not sure of the durability. • Thought Countryside was boring but, did like the sidewalk separation between main structure and swings. • Love the swing and climbing net at York Park but, not fans of a wood structure. They thought over time not the best investment. • Can the City of Edina assign a scale to the park? That way Matt can play with the space in relation to desired amenities. Next Meeting: • Thursday, December 16th at 8:00 a.m. — 9:00 a.m. in the Mayor's Conference Room. C7 Chowen Park Playground Committee Notes Thursday, December 16, 2010 General Comments/Park Vision: • Re -use as much of the current concrete container as possible. Make the curb cut Next Meeting: • Thursday, December 301h at 8:00 a.m. — 9:15 a.m. in the Mayors Conference Room. C, at the corner of the basketball court. • Remove backstop it's only being used as something to climb on and York Park has a beautiful new baseball field. • Add soccer goals. Ed MacHolda recommends going to www.KwikGoal.com and look at different size soccer goals. Ed MacHolda also recommends something smaller than Strachauer Park (7' x 21') either a 6' x 12' (Creek Valley & Garden Park size) or 4 %' x 9. • Add 3 trees to the locations indicated on the drawing. Ed MacHolda will visit with Vince Cockriel Park Superintendent and Tom Horwath City Forester. I met with Vince Cockriel and gave him a copy of the drawing, he'll provide a price. • Add 5 benches and keep consistent with the two at the north end of the park. I met with Vince Cockriel regarding the benches, he'll provide a price. • Add 2 trash receptacles and keep consistent with the one at the north end of the park. I met with Vince Cockriel regarding the trash receptacles, he'll provide a price. • Would like 2 bucket, 2 belts and 1 ADA swing. • Would like 1 tire swing. • Would like swings along the northwest side of the playground container. • Would like the color's to be black, green and tan. It was felt that Alden Park may have used too much tan and made the park look plastic. • Would like a sandbox like Pamela Park only using the tree as the natural shade element. Guessing it will be a 20' diameter. • Would like a 2 — 5 tot structure located by the sandbox or southeast end of the playground container. • Would like a 5 —12 standalone piece by the 4 -square. • Would like the 5 —12 components to be Evos. • Would like a standalone stainless steel slide. • Would like to paint Hop Scotch to the north of the 4 -square. Next Meeting: • Thursday, December 301h at 8:00 a.m. — 9:15 a.m. in the Mayors Conference Room. C, Chowen Park Playground Committee Notes Thursday, December 30, 2010 Gametime Presentation: • Items missing from neighborhood list: tire swing, stainless steel slide, ADA swing and seating around sandbox. • Not sure about the hanging pod link. • Add more netting. • Add additional rock wall. • Eliminate 2 — 5 standalone structure. • Like the grouping. • Want to stay away from plastic appearance. • Would like black posts with green accent and minimal tan. Little Tykes Presentation: • 3 plans. • Change sandbox to be more like a half moon and incorporate tree for natural shade. ® • Provide more steel and rope. • Provide connection between components. • Eliminate 2 — 5 standalone structure. 0 • Chowen Park Open House Wednesday, February 16th, 2011 Neighborhood Committee: Matt Dubbe and Jennifer Corniea Staff Present: Ed MacHolda, City of Edina, Dan Lanes, Gametime and Eric Denning, Gametime Community Members Present: Tom Love, Kaj, Etta, Nola, Pauline Birt, Angela Gadtke, Beth Parkhurst, Wayne Yarmoska, Helen Yarmoska, Julie Donovan, lack Sullivan, John & Kim Erickson, Jeff Carlson, Sean McGrath and John Rocheford Comments: • Parent of two little ones and very excited about new playground equipment, but heart sank when I saw this plan. I love the sandbox, but would like more 2 — 5 components. • What is the budget for the park? Ed MacHolda responded that it was not to exceed $120,000.00. • What is the longevity and attractiveness? I like the look of York Park's wood and steel combination as well as shade. Matt Dubbe explained the pros and cons of a wood structure versus the proposed aluminum powered coated posts. • What can we expect for the durability and/or life expectancy? Matt Dubbe and Ed MacHolda both responded it should be at least twenty years, maybe longer. • Someone commented that kids love riding bikes and roller skating on the basketball court. • Another person commented that they were concerned about the lack of 2 — 5 components. • Another person commented that they like there's no place for older kids to hide and do drug deals. • What are the neighborhood demographics? It seems like it's gotten younger. I'm interested in younger components. Ed MacHolda found out that between York Avenue, 60th Street, France Avenue and 57th Street there are 203 0 — 5 year olds and 794 6 — 12 year olds. • • What is the proposed size/height of the swings? 0 • Ed MacHolda asked should we eliminate one of the plastic climbing walls? • Ed MacHolda also asked should we replace the slide with a 2 — 5 structure? • Someone asked if kids could play on in the winter time? Matt Dubbe and Dan Lanes responded that yes, they could. • Another person asked if it was required to have the handicap swing. If not, could we have two buckets instead? Dan Lanes responded that it wasn't mandatory, but if the City of Edina got a call from a family that has a child with a disability they would need to put it in. • Someone stated they were glad the pea gravel will be gone. • Another person stated they would like to see tetherball. • Someone else stated that adults play basketball all the time so we should keep in mind the location of the 2 — 5 components. • The group further discussed removing some of the 5 —12 components and adding a small 2 — 5 structure. • It was mentioned that it would be nice if the 2 — 5 structure could be placed next to the sandbox. • Someone asked if there are other parks which already have X-scapes that we could visit. Dan Lanes responded that it's a brand new line for Gametime. • Another person stated it doesn't seem to make sense to remove three 5 —12 components for a small 2 — 5 structure. • Someone else stated I really think we need a 2 — 5 piece. • ® From: Wayne Yarmoska [mailto:yarmoska@earthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 1:22 PM To: Ed MacHolda Subject: Chowen Park Open House Dear Mr. MacHolda, I just want to pass along a note of thanks for hosting last night's Open House regarding the proposed playground equipment replacement plan for Chowen Park. Given all the Park and Rec projects on your plate, spending an evening asking for citizen input on a relatively modest project in one of the smaller parks is appreciated. That's what makes Edina great. Census is rarely achieved, but with the continued help of Matt Dubbe and Jenny Corniea I'm confident the final equipment proposal will be a success. I can't think of two better park advocates to represent our neighbor. If you would, please pass along my sincere thanks to Matt and Jenny for their time and effort on the proposal. Our house is on the corner of 57`" & Chowen, bordering the entire length of the north side of the park. I came prepared to talk about issues related to the basketball court and parking area across from our house. I understand that was off -topic for the purpose of yesterday's discussion. However, I'd be happy to participate in any future discussions regarding these other areas of the park. • Again, thank you all. Best regards, Wayne Yarmoska 5644 Chowen Ave. 952-926-5687 0 • From: Matt Dubbe[mailto:Matt.Dubbe@meadhunt.com] Sent: Thursday, February 17, 20119:30 AM To: Ed MacHolda; Jennifer Corniea Subject: Chowen Park - the path forward Hi Ed, After processing the meeting over the evening, I would like to suggest a path forward in an effort to secure the necessary approvals with the Park board. In many respects, having one person attempt to derail what is overwhelmingly received as a win-win situation suggests flaws in the public process. Having the inability to change that, we should focus on what the end product will be and how it serves the community. I would suggest that the original design be presented to the Park board as the preferred option. We need to craft an educated response as to why tot lots are becoming less common and that the proposed design serves that age as well. Indeed, it encourages growth through observation and mimicry. Ultimately, parents will need to attend to their toddler whether it is on nets, platforms or adjacent to high slides. From a public funds perspective, it is not a prudent expenditure to spend $3K+ for an element • with limited use. This piece could be option B but I suspect that this will not be the final compromise. The point is what serves the greater community and not an appeasement to a single individual. I am doubtful that she is aware of the potential to set this project back many months but I wonder if that possibility is secondary to fulfilling individual preferences. The notion that she will see the error of her ways in the not too distant future is of little consolation. Enough of that. I do feel that the overall range of comments was constructive and made me believe in the ability of our neighbors to think clearly. This is the message that you probably will need to plant with John and others in the time period before the next meeting. Unfortunately, I have an incoming flight @ 8:11 p.m. so I will miss the affair. I apologize for that but rarely do I make my own schedule. Jenny and I discussed whether she should reach out to this woman and I wonder if that is the right decision. I do know that the neighbors that attended last night consider this matter resolved and will not attend the next meeting. If opposition attends, the ruling members need to know the back story. At the end of the day, what the community is getting is a progressive, unique park design that is on budget, on schedule and supports the healthy growth policies of the city. Pardon the pep talk, just trying to retain perspective. All for now. I welcome your thoughts.Matt Dubbe, AIA, <image003.gif>, NCARB I Project • Manager, Architecture • From: Courtney B. Whited [mailto:courtneybwhited@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, February 17, 20112:03 PM To: Ed MacHolda Subject: Chowen Park playground equipment Hi, I was unable to make it to last night's meeting about the Chowen Park playground equipment. I have a few questions. I live at 5829 Chowen. Will the cost of the new equipment be assessed to my taxes or will I have to pay for it in any manner? What will the new equipment look like? When would construction be completed? Thank you, Courtney Boettcher - Whited 0 0 • From: Angela Gadtke [mailto:gadbuild@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, February 18, 20116:25 AM To: Ed MacHolda Subject: Re: Chowen Park D510035 Hi Ed, I spent two hours last night finding every component from the plan in the catalog. Now I have a very good visual of what things might look like in regards to the "little play structure" and larger structures. I do have comments I would like to share and suggest. I would probably be available for a phone conversation after I get my kids down for a nap. That would be around 1:00/1:30 today. I ran into two neighbors that have very young children yesterday when I was out on a walk with my kids. I shared briefly the proposed plans with them, and their first reaction, like mine, was of great concern regarding lack of activities for the under five crowd. I think we will get to a point where everyone's needs are met. Thanks again for the opportunity. Please let me know if you are available for a phone conversation this afternoon. Angela Gadtke • 40 From: Jennifer Corniea [mailto:Jennifer.Corniea@mpls.kl2.mn.us] Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 1:01 PM To: Matt Dubbe Subject: Re: Chowen Park - the path forward Ed, I really felt that the plan that was agreed upon in our meeting was a fair compromise and incorporated the one piece that the toddlers may have missed ... the slide. The other suggestions that were made, the giant dinosaur slide and the airplane style swing, are in the plan, in alternative forms ... the belt swing and the mini slide. The community process took place and a decision was agreed upon by all... to take the revised plan to the Park Board. We created an innovative and forward thinking design and it should not be derailed because someone is having a hard time visualizing how 2-3 yr. olds can enjoy the equipment. I have worked with elementary students for 16 years, am raising three kids and I think the plan fairly represents all ages. I say we stand behind what our neighborhood reps have decided to support. Whew, that's not easy to do on a phone! Thanks, Jenny • Pi From: Angela Gadtke [mai Ito: gadbuild@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 3:13 PM To: Ed MacHolda Subject: Re: Chowen Park D5100J5C Hi Ed, My initial reaction is, "Wow! Looks fantastic!" I will review tonight and try and give you a call tomorrow or e-mail you. Thanks again! Angela • 0 From: Matt Dubbe[mailto:Matt.Dubbe@meadhunt.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 20119:44 AM To: Ed MacHolda; Jennifer.Corniea@mpls.kl2.mn.us Subject: RE: Chowen Park W Thanks for the update. While "three" revisions may sell the process short, you are correct that through the efforts of everyone involved, consensus was reached and all of the original parameters (scope, budget, schedule) were met. This is due in large part to your efforts and Jenny and I are happy to have contributed. We are pleased that Angela is satisfied and supportive. Building divisions within neighborhoods is never healthy and surely not an intended outcome of the process. It is unfortunate and unprofessional that Jack Sullivan would channel his concerns in this manner. As a city employee and an engineer, I would assume that he is conversant in process and the practical applications of our design. I can only hope that John coached him in the age old motivation of "are you part of the problem or are you part of the solution?". If Jack is unsure of the intent of the design, he can call me directly. While I am unable to attend the meeting, my wife Catherine and children will be there. Jenny will be there as well as others in the neighborhood. This does have the opportunity to be a win-win for the city • where community volunteer input is solicited and consensus was reached in a fiscally prudent manner. When this approved at the meeting, I will offer my assistance in the bidding and construction phase. Spring is coming! Cheers. Matt Dubbe, AIA, Q NCARB f Project Manager, Architecture is March 2, 2011 Mr. MacHolda, Thank you for hosting the open house on February 16th to review the proposed playground equipment for Chowen Park. This was a great opportunity to better understand the hard work and time that went into choosing this playground. As you know our family lives 2 blocks from the park and frequent Chowen (and the other parks in the area) with our three boys; ages 4, and twins that are 2. After seeing the graphics and hearing the presentation I was very disappointed with the initial proposal. The equipment did not look to be designed to accommodate the needs of users of multiple ages By the admission of the manufactures representative and the appointed neighborhood design team the proposed equipment would not be suitable for toddlers. They stated that it was designed for an older age group. I have since contacted you to learn that the plan has been revised to bridge a much larger age group. I understand and agree that toddlers grow out of their equipment too quickly to make it a viable option for the park. I am advocating for a park that has the type of equipment and amenities that can be navigated by users of all ages. The designs shown on March 1st are moving toward this goal, however in my opinion they still fall short in some areas. As we discussed, I believe it is possible to design equipment that can provide the safety for smaller children while providing challenges for older children. • A great example of such equipment is McGuire Park. This equipment, although stated for an older child, is very easily accessed by much younger children. The equipment is such that it provides ever increasing platform heights and has barriers to help prevent falls. Conversely, from my experience York Park is very "high, open and liner" and is too challenging for the younger children. I offer the following comments on the revised plan you presented to me on March 1st in your office: 1. Continue to modify the design to incorporate play structures that more closely resemble the style found at McGuire and Wooddale Parks. These structure types have the flexibility to be utilized by children of many age groups. The high, thin, linear play structures are only utilized by more advanced older users. Place the final decision of the type of play structure equipment in the hands of staff, the professionals. I believe your department has the knowledge, education and experience to know the equipment that will be best suited for the 20 year life span of the design. I was disappointed to find out that the park was designed by a team of two residents who live directly behind or very near the park. This group was formed in late November after the play season was finished. The team could not solicit input from residents who were actually using the park. Many residents at the open house stated they were unhappy with the design that was heavily weighted to older children. In addition, the type of equipment which is very linear and "see through" is also equipment that is not conducive to greater level of safety. C 3. A smaller footprint for the play area is preferred. Chowen Park is a small neighborhood park and a footprint at 106 feet (or less) will fit with the scale of the park more appropriately then the 116 foot option. In addition, as the play area gets too big it is difficult to watch siblings or multiple children playing at opposite ends of the area. 4. The current design has some repetitive pieces of play equipment to York Park (web rope tower and the circle spin tower). Although these may be popular pieces at York there is no reason to spend money to duplicate these features just two blocks away. The reason my family travels from Strachaeur to Chowen to York is to get a variety of play equipment. It makes a unique and fun experience for my children. We pick different parks based on our desired experience that day. There is no reason to make every park in Edina (or a least the side of Edina) have the same experience. 5. Save the money from the duplicate equipment to spend on a turf type surface similar to McGuire Park. Currently the basketball court is covered with pea gravel from the play area and poses a safety hazard. The basketball court will be covered with wood fiber with the proposed redesign. Use some of the cost saving to create a surface that compliments the basketball court, four square area and picnic shelter. 6. I have heard discussion about revising the basketball court at a later date. I strongly believe the basketball court should remain as -is and is a key component of the park. The court is used for basketball, bike riding, roller blading, etc. To limit the size or to fence the area in is not something our family would like to see. Most homes in this neighborhood have single driveways with little or no room from driveway basketball • nets. The park is a great location for this type of activity. 7. I noticed all designs have the elm tree as a central component of the plan with a sand box around it. Has the City forester looked at the condition of the elm? The back side of the tree is routinely cut by Xcel energy and the threat of Dutch Elm disease most certainly means the elm will not meet the 20 year life span of the proposed park. In addition, the increased maintenance of the sand box due to falling branches and leaves seems to be a undue burden on the park staff. Thank you again for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed designs. I believe the steps taken since the February 16th open house are moving toward a play structure that will be enjoyed and utilized by many different age groups for years to come. I ask that the staff utilize their expertise and input from all residents to continue to refine the design to incorporate more pieces that provide safety and challenges to all ages to enhance Chowen Park. Regards, Jack and Lynne Sullivan 5808 Beard Avenue South Edina, MN 55410 mnilsully comcast.net 0 • Commission Chairs and Staff Liaisons: Over the past month, I have received questions about filming of City meetings and requests from commissions to vary from the City's existing video production practices. I raised the question with the City Council at its Feb. 15 Council meeting to seek their guidance on how to respond to these questions and requests. The Council asked me to seek input from Commissions on the matter, to aggregate that input, and to present the Council a recommendation on the matter at the Council's April 19 meeting. In order to seek the input of Commissioners on this topic, I am directing this email to Commission chairs and staff liaisons to add this topic to your March meeting agendas. I would like to receive input from Commissions on the following questions: 1. Do you believe that filming your Commission meeting, and subsequently rebroadcasting the filmed meeting on cable television, would change the manner in which commissioners or guests behave or participate in your Commission meetings? 2. Do you believe there are circumstances where filming and rebroadcasting your Commission meetings would not be in the public interest? If so, what would be an example of such a circumstance? 3. Do you believe that filming and rebroadcasting your Commission meetings is an important tool in communicating your Commission's activities and discussions with the public? 4. Do you have any other input that you would like me or the Council to consider when forming a policy on this subject? • 1 would prefer that Commissions not take a vote or a straw poll on whether their meetings ought to be filmed. I believe that a short discussion and set of responses to the proposed questions will provide us the sufficient input we need to create a workable proposal for the Council to consider at its April 19 meeting. Please route Commission input to me through the appropriate staff liaisons before the end of March. If there are any questions or concerns about this process, please advise. Thank you. Scott Neal, City Manager lf�z 952-826-0401 1 Fax 952-826-0390 snealCcilci.edina.mn.us I www.CityofEdina.com ...1'or Living, Learning, Raising Families & DoingBusiness 0 • Dear Professional Golf Course Consultant: The City of Edina is interested in hiring professional consulting services to study a variety of aspects of the City's golf course facilities and its operations located in Edina, Minnesota. The purpose of the study is to identify areas that are in keeping with industry's standards and best practices and more importantly identify areas in need of improvement and offer suggestions to improve efficiencies, profitability and attract more business while retaining current customers. As shown below, the study should also include recommendations to enhance facilities where there are cost effective returns on investment. For example, the Braemar Golf Dome Clubhouse building will soon be in need of a replacement; however, we are interested in knowing if that is financially prudent and there other cost effective alternatives that should be considered. SCOPE OF STUDY The proposed scope of the study should include: • All facilities and operations of Braemar Golf Course, Fred Richards Golf Course and Braemar Golf Dome • Individual profit centers (Food & Beverage, Pro Shop, Driving Range, Carts) • Facility Review (condition, functionality, aesthetics, potential/utilization etc.) • Clubhouse operations • Maintenance practices • • Fee structures • Membership (patron card holders) and marketing plan • Market analysis (compared to other courses in the Twin Cities) • Capital improvement needs • Financial statements • Lease/concession agreements • General operational procedures • Management Structures • Staffing Practices The City of Edina has a staff created Business Plan for our Golf Course operations. We ask that the Golf Course Consultant provide recommendations for improvements to that Business Plan. The study should also include responses and recommendations from the consultant to answer the following questions: Should the City of Edina make the following facility improvements? • Expand the driving range and convert the Braemar Executive Course to a Par 3 Course. • Improvements to help playability on the 9 -hole Clunie Course. • Replace the Braemar Golf Dome Clubhouse building. • Develop more cart -friendly hard surface paths around the entire course. • Replace or expand or renovate Braemar Golf Course Clubhouse. • . EXPERIENCE In your response to this Request for Proposal, please include your firm's previous experience studying golf course operations for the past ten years. CONSULTING TEAM MEMBERS Please include the names of all of your team members who will be involved in the study and a brief background of their qualifications. APPROACH TO THE PROJECT AND PROCESS Please include your proposed approach to this study and what process your firm would use to conduct the study and make recommendations. Please include your proposed timeframe to conduct the study. PROPOSED FEE Please identify your proposed consulting fee, which we ask to be a fixed amount plus reimbursable expenses. Please identify a not to exceed amount for reimbursable expenses. # OF PAGES AND COPIES OF RESPONSE TO PROPOSAL We ask that you please keep your proposals to no more than six pages including your cover letter. We ask that you please submit three copies of your proposal. The City of Edina will copy and distribute any additional copies needed for the review process. • DEADLINE Proposals should be received no later than Tuesday, March 29, 2011. SELECTION PROCESS With assistance from staff, the Edina Park Board will select and recommend a finalist to the City Council for final approval. It is yet to be determined if there will be interviews required of the finalists. The City of Edina reserves the right to select a consulting firm based on which one appears to offer the best value to the City of Edina and not necessarily the lowest bid. Please submit your proposal to: John Keprios, Director Edina Park and Recreation Department 4801 West 50�' Street Edina, MN 55424 If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 952-826-0430 or JKeprios@ci.edina.mn.us. Respectfully, John Keprios, Director Edina Park and Recreation Department 0 Proposed Task Force Composition • 1 member representing Braemar Men's Club 1 member representing Braemar Women's Club 1 member representing Braemar Association/Board 1 member representing high school golf 2 members representing the Park Board 3 at large community representatives If the City Council approves the recommendation to create a task force, each entity above would be asked to submit the name of the person who will represent them by a certain date. A press release and posting would solicit at large representatives. Park Board could make the selection from all applications, or could delegate that responsibility to the chair or staff or some combination (subcommittee). The Park Board would then approve the slate of task force members. Purpose and Timeline of the Taskforce: Task force would meet to define specific questions and concerns for the consultant. Consultant completes evaluation, presents report to Park Board. Task force meets over defined time period to weigh report and develop and present an action plan to the Park Board. • 0