Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-08-09 Park Board PacketAGENDA CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA PARK BOARD CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tuesday, August 9, 2011 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 of July 12, 2011 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 some 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 tofuture meeting. VI. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS A. Donations Policy and Naming of Parks and Facilities Policy Working Group B. User Fees Working Group C. Sports Dome Study Committee D. 2012-2016 Capital Improvement Plans VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VIII. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS IX. STAFF COMMENTS A. Golf Course Study Presentation —August 30, 2011 B. Edinborough Park Study C. Veterans Memorial Update XI. 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. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PARK BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL JULY 12, 2011 7:00 PM L CALL TO ORDER Chairman Hulbert called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm IL ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Deeds, Fronek, Jacobson, Jones, Lough, Meyer, Peterson, Segreto, Steel and Chair Hulbert III. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BOARD MEMBER New member Deeds introduced himself to the Park Board and apologized for not being at the previous meetings. He explained when he was appointed he did not realize it would conflict with the night class he was teaching at St. Thomas College. IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Steel asked since there is a new format for the agenda will that be reflective in the upcoming minutes such as "Call to Order". She pointed out that the May Park Board minutes do not reflect a "Call to Order" and that it looks like in other board and commission minutes that item does appear and asked if it was necessary that they have that item; she would like those minutes to reflect that since she chaired the May Park Board meeting she would like for them to reflect that she did call the meeting to order. Member Steel made a motion seconded by Member Meyer that the May 2011 Park Board Minutes reflect that the meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Steel. V. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Member Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Deeds approving the consent agenda. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of May 10, 2011 with changes approved by Park Board under Agenda Item IV. VI. COMMUNITY COMMENT Elizabeth Stevens, 3205 West 60`h Street, addressed the Park Board regarding the "Nite to Unite" event that will take place on August 2"d. She pointed out that it is basically the same thing as "National Night Out' where neighborhoods get together and have block parties. She stated that some of the people at the dog park thought it might be fun to organize their "Nite to Unite" at the dog park. She indicated that she was hoping she could post a sign at the park that says dog owners we plan to unite on August 2nd along with all of the neighborhood folks. She commented that they would avoid the food part but would say bring your dog, chair and something to drink. She stated that basically she is looking for some sort of 1 acknowledgement from the park side of things that this is not necessarily a bad idea. Member Segreto replied that she thinks it's a great idea but it should be noted that no alcohol is allowed at the park. Chair Hulbert commented that it sounds like a great idea but questions if they are organizing some sort of event would that trigger some sort of necessity to rent that park like they have done for other groups. Mr. MacHolda responded that in this case he doesn't think they need to go through the park permit process. He stated that it sounds like they are just trying to get other dog owners together and socialize on a given night. Ms. Stevens indicated that another opportunity that occurred to her is there may be a chance to raise revenue by selling more dog collars or reminding people to register their dogs. She noted that she could coordinate some sort of table or booth because she thinks there are still a lot of dog owners who don't even know Edina has a dog park. Mr. MacHolda replied that personally he would like to see the selling of collars stay at City Hall versus a satellite site that night. He noted that he is all for the socialization of both dog owners and dogs. VII. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS VII.A. CONSULTANT FINALISTS FOR EDINBOROUGH PARK STUDY Ann Kattreh, Manager of Edinborough Park, informed the Park Board that they received eight good proposals from the RFP that was sent out to hire a consultant. She explained that Mr. Keprios, Ms. Miller and herself narrowed it down to what they felt were the top four. She stated that they are looking for input from the Park Board on the four they selected and noted that they could add more if the Park Board so desires and then they can go ahead and set up interviews. She indicated that she thinks it's a good idea to actually sit down and have an interview process and ask some questions as well as give them the opportunity to ask us some questions and maybe get a little more of a comfort level with the architect and consultant. Ms. Kattreh asked the Park Board to let her know if there are any specific questions they would like to have asked during the interview process. In addition, if anyone would like to sit in on the interviews, to also let her know. Member Deeds asked is the primary goal of having a consultant to try to revitalize as well as understand potential higher level uses, etc. Ms. Kattreh replied that is partially correct. She explained that Edinborough is operating at about a 75% to 80% cost recovery and explained how a trust fund was originally set up for Edinborough when it was first opened. She noted it was originally intended to financially support the operations indefinitely; however, that will not be the case and explained the reasons why. Ms. Kattreh indicated that the City Council has given them the task to try to come to a break even basis and by hiring a consultant they intend to look at all operations of Edinborough everything from the staffing to the programming to the facility itself to find a way to save costs and generate additional revenue. She added that Edinborough was never designed to be a revenue generating facility. Member Segreto noted that ATS&R indicated that they have already worked on some of the components of the park and asked which components they have been involved in. Ms. Kattreh replied that is a little misleading because they have not worked on Edinborough Park but rather they have worked at some other parks in Edina. Member Fronek indicated that it seems part of the recommendation that staff is looking for is to basically grant them the power to select one of the consultants moving forward which he is fine with but wanted to know how staff would arrive at the decision. Ms. Kattreh explained that what they hope to do is bring in anyone from the Park Board that may be interested either in terms of sitting in on the interviews or providing questions for them to ask. Ms. Kattreh commented that she does not know if Mr. Keprios was planning on bringing staff's recommendation to the Park Board prior to the City 2 Council. She noted they are hoping to have the interviews take place the last week in July or first week in August. She pointed out that the City Manager. has asked Mr. Keprios and herself to sit down and explain to him the reasons why they selected who they did and then it would go to City Council for their approval. She stated that they could bring their selection back to the Park Board before they take it to the City Council. Member Meyer stated his perspective is if it's going to accelerate the process to go straight to the City Council he wouldn't object to that especially if it's going to add several months and delay the opportunity to get the data. He indicated he feels the data is the most important thing and clearly several of the firms are qualified to collect the data. Member Meyer asked Ms. Kattreh why they didn't go directly to Ballard & King. Ms. Kattreh responded that she felt it is important to bring the architectural component as well because they are hoping for some conceptual drawings on any recommendations that they might have pertaining to changes to the facility and that's not something that Ballard & King would specialize in; therefore, they need the architectural component as well. Member Jones asked Ms. Kattreh if she has brought in any of the businesses that are adjacent to the park such as Edina Park Plaza and the Residence Inn. Ms. Kattreh replied that although they will be key players she has not at this point because she feels they would be putting the cart before the horse. She indicated that personally she would like to have a little more information to discuss with them as opposed to talking about a variety of concepts that may or may not happen. Ms. Kattreh stated that they are aware they are looking at the facility and that just this past week they started construction on the guest services counter and the concession stand. Member Jones stated that she thought that was put on hold because they were going to be looking at the long-term plan for that. Ms. Kattreh replied that it . was discussed to be put on hold but because it was in their capital improvement plan they decided to move forward with it. Member Peterson asked what they mean by Edinborough "Understanding" that was on the matrix. Ms. Kattreh explained that what they meant by that is did they tailor items in their proposal to Edinborough, did they in fact understand their complex and understand the difficulties in dealing with their complex in regards to items such as neighbors, association fees, different user groups, etc. She stated that they feel the two firms where that was marked was because they felt the proposal they submitted took more time in getting to know their operations a little bit more prior to submitting the proposal and added that those two also spent a considerable amount of time with both Mr. Keprios and herself. Member Deeds stated that he would be interested in seeing some of the interviews because the proposal really doesn't tell you much and that three of the four proposals are almost the exact same proposal. He indicated that what he is interested in understanding is what they mean by "market research"; is it simply that they are going to tell them how many facilities are within 10 square miles or are they going to be potentially in some way, shape or form gathering real market research which he would be interested in. Member Fronek made a motion, seconded by Member Segreto to accept the four finalists recommended by staff and to provide Mr. Keprios and Ms. Kattreh the authority to select one candidate after the interview process without Park Board approval so that it can be done by the August Park Board meeting. Ayes: Deeds, Fronek, Jacobson, Jones, Lough, Meyer, Peterson, Segreto, Steel and Chair Hulbert. Motion carried. Chair Hulbert stated that he would like Member Deeds to be on the interview committee to which Member Deeds replied he would be happy to meet with Ms. Kattreh. 3 VU B. PARK BOARD BYLA WS Mr. MacHolda pointed out that as Mr. Keprios states in his report/recommendation the proposed bylaws draft is consistent with current city code and is similar to other board and commission bylaws in general procedurally provides the Park Board the authority to establish its own committees without prior council approval. Member Segreto stated that on page 2, #6 second paragraph it states "to provide for the selection of one or two spokespersons to represent groups of persons with common interests during public meetings" and commented that she thinks that would be really hard to do. Chair Hulbert responded that he thinks in meetings like that people step forward and say they are going to speak for the group and then you can say alright and then that person will be the representative by speaking on behalf of the group. Member Segreto asked Chair Hulbert if he thought pragmatically that is clear enough. Chair Hulbert replied yes and added that he thinks it's fairly common. Member Segreto noted that in Article II, Section 3 it states that the Board does not have the authority to introduce contracts or expenditures and asked if they have the authority to solicit contracts or expenditures because she is not quite sure what the word "introduce" really means. She commented that maybe the drafter could take note of the comment and maybe explore or see if it needs to be clarified. Member Segreto pointed out there is no conflict of interest paragraph in these bylaws and asked if any of the other boards and commissions have a conflict of interest. Lastly, she stated that she thinks it's important for all of the board members to know what the attendance requirement is. Member Steel indicated that she has a couple of suggestions as well. She noted that Article III Section II talks about special meetings and thought they may want to include work sessions and define the purpose as an informational meeting where no actions would be taken. She stated this may be a good place to establish that and provide definition in the future to give the Park Board the opportunity to hold those types of meetings. Member Deeds indicated that where it states "the board does not have the authority to introduce contracts or expenditures" that if you look at the mission it seems to put the board strictly in a review position that they are not in a position to make suggestions either to the council or staff. He stated that he is little leery of that language and would like to see something else. He indicated if that is the language they are going for then they need to be clear that they are strictly here to review whatever it is that the staff brings up and if that coincides with the mission then they need to be clear of that. Member Deeds stated that he would argue to leave the special meetings as open as possible because that will give them the freedom to call whatever and whenever they deem something necessary, it gives them flexibility. Member Jones indicated that in regards to Article V, committees and subcommittees she would like to see at least one person from the Park Board be a participant in a committee and ideally be the chair of any committee they form. She stated that she would also like to identify what is expected from these committees such as will minutes be taken, etc. Member Jones stated that she thinks they can write a better mission statement to actually state what they do. She indicated that she would be willing to try to write something up with incorporating what has just been said and other comments the members may come up with. She added if anyone would like to work on it with her that would be great. Member Peterson stated that the mission statement is straightforward; however, it doesn't get into something else which he thinks they should and that is healthy lifestyles which he feels the Park Board should be promoting for various age groups. For example, if you were to walk around Bredesen Park 25 times a summer you will be recognized in some way such as with a hat or a badge. He stated that he thinks the better cities get into promoting healthy lifestyles, like Edina is doing with the Farmer's Market; the better off the population will age. 4 Chair Hulbert commented that if Member Jones is willing to take this on with some of the ideas that have been mentioned and bring a draft to the next Park Board meeting that would be great. Member Lough asked how they address the issue of standardization with other boards and commissions would Member Jones take that on as well. Member Jones replied that she does have a copy of most of the other boards and commissions by-laws and noted she was surprised how they differ in every way. She indicated that it's not just the functions of the commissions but there are some major differences. She stated that she is not going to try and change all of the bylaws but will talk to the City Manager, Scott Neal and see if he has any ideas. Mr. MacHolda pointed out that Mr. Keprios recommendation does indicate that after further review with the City Manager it appears that each board and commission is unique enough in their own function and mission that it would be difficult to standardize bylaws in every regard. Member Segreto asked who drafted the bylaws to which it was noted Mr. Keprios. Member Jones asked as far as members of the Park Board does anyone feel strongly that they should be residents of Edina to which the Park Board replied yes. Member Steel commented that in regards to the suggestion that was previously made regarding absences she believes those are in the City Code. She noted that she thinks the idea with bylaws is not to repeat what is already in City Code and added that what is in the City Code takes power over anything they write in their bylaws. Member Lough suggested that perhaps they reference that specific City Code for attendance. Member Deeds asked if the current mission is a long standing mission or did Mr. Keprios just write it. Mr. MacHolda replied he believes it is long standing. Member Jones commented that she would be open to a new mission. Member Steel pointed out that Under Section III. "Members" they may want to add residents of Edina" because only under student members does it state "shall be residents of the city ... ". Chair Hulbert commented that he is pretty sure there is already something in the City Code about residency. Member Jones noted that she will take a look at it and added that she believes one other commission had something where it was stated really clear that City Code takes precedence over anything, even bylaws if there is a conflict so she may add that same wording. Chair Hulbert made a motion, seconded by Member Deeds to table the bylaws until the August Park Board meeting. Ayes: Deeds, Fronek, Jacobson, Jones, Lough, Meyer, Peterson, Segreto, Steel and Chair Hulbert. Motion carried. VII. C. APPOINT BOARD MEMBER TO HUMAN SERVICES TASK FORCE Member Segreto volunteered to be the Park Board member on the Human Services Task Force. VIII. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Member Segreto asked where they are with the subcommittees. Member Jones replied that she has spoken to Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications Director, to help publicize the request for people who may be interested in working on the two subcommittees. Member Deeds indicated that he saw the various e-mails regarding "Cool Planet" and Frisbee golf and asked what happened with that. Mr. MacHolda replied there was some miscommunication but Mr. Thompson did end up going through the permit process and Dick Crockett from the Edina Foundation did bring in a check to the Park and Recreation Department office before the event took place. . Member Jones informed the Park Board that regarding the Bike Edina Task Force they applied for bike racks which she believes they will get money for. She noted they will be able to purchase 40 to 60 bike 5 racks at no cost to the city except for installation. She added that someone from the Bike Task Force is working with Wayne Houle, City Engineer, as where they will be going. Member Jones informed the Park Board that the Edina Bike Task Force had a very successful "Bike to Work Day" which they do annually and this year 12 people signed up which is more than ever. She also pointed out that there will be a city wide tour of Edina which is going to be run with the Edina Rotary on October 9"' and they hope to raise money for food shelves. Member Jones informed the Park Board that the Energy & Environment Commission has been reviewing the turf management plan to which she has attended several meetings and they will be presenting a new executive summary she believes at their next meeting. Member Jones informed the Park Board that the public works site group that is looking at the vision for the old public works building is in the stage where they are conducting interviews for who will be working on the proposals. IX. STAFF COMMENTS Mr. MacHolda informed the Park Board that the City Council did approve the taping of the Park Board meetings on a quarterly basis so the Park Board meetings will be taped August, November, February and May. All of the other Park Board meetings will be audiotaped. Mr. MacHolda informed the Park Board that they had a wonderful Fourth of July parade and fireworks display. He noted that he would like to personally thank staff and the parade committee for the wonderful job they did. There is a lot of work that goes into these two events. Mr. MacHolda informed the Park Board that the new Chowen Park playground design and equipment turned out beautiful and they were open and operational the first part of June. However shortly after they opened the calls started coming about a bug infestation. He indicated that the vendor sent out their expert and determined it is what they call a "wood mite". He noted they then got into the dialog was it a contaminated safety surface which is the stance the city took and the manufacturer took the stance it was pre-existing but either case they had a problem. He noted that after some research they did spray the entire site which they found to be 50% successful. At that time they quarantined the park and came to the conclusion from the city to go to the manufacturer because it needed to be removed so they had all of the wood fiber removed, which was too bad because it's a wonderful safety surface. He explained that for the last three to four weeks he has been chasing the manufacturer and the general contractor to try to go beyond the removal of the safety surface and get an acceptable safety surface in place and reopen the park. He indicated that today they began to put in pea gravel as well as they also gave him a drawing of what it will take to make it accessible. Mr. MacHolda pointed out that when it was originally drawn it had 100% accessibility and now they will meet their minimum ADA requirements which will cost an additional $11,000 and so after talking to the manufacturer they will first make it playable and then will come back and make it accessible so they should be able to reopen the park tomorrow. Mr. MacHolda informed the Park Board that on June 1" they had a successful bid opening for the flow rider and it was approved by City Council on June 21" and as of right now he thinks their opening will be May or June of 2012. Mr. MacHolda informed the Park Board that there has been a proposal for an athletic dome by a small group of residents who are developers. He noted that this group has had a number of meetings with various athletic associations, the school board, city staff and he believes independently with elected officials. He pointed out that the next step in their process will be a work session with City Council a week from today at 5:00 pm. He stated that he knows football and lacrosse have sent out e-mails to their bodies looking to show support to their elected officials and believes there are other groups who are also interested. Mr. MacHolda noted that he hasn't heard anyone is opposed but that he does think there are other groups that think further study needs to be done. He commented that right now the site they are looking at is Braemar which would take up the athletic field that is currently behind the arenas as well as take up part of the parking lot which is to the north of the west arena; it's a fairly large structure. He added that one of the developers has done this type of project successfully in other cities. XI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Park Board Agenda, Chair Hulbert declared the meeting adjourned at 8:16 pm. 7 o yCQR?VFtf't' 9 1666 REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: EDINA PARK BOARD Agenda Item Item No. VI. A. From: John Keprios, Director 1-1 Action Park and Recreation Department Discussion Information Date: August 9, 2011 Donations Policy and Naming of Parks and Facilities Policy Working Subject: Group ACTION REQUESTED: No formal Park Board action is requested on this agenda item. This item is intended to update Park Board members on the status of the formation of the Donations Policy and Naming of Parks and Facilities Policy Working Group. INFORMATION/BACKGROUND: The City Council approved the Park Board's request to form a Working Group to revisit the donations policy, as well as, propose a written naming of parks and facilities policy. The terminology "Work Group" is used here as opposed to "Committee" simply because the Park Board has expressed an interest in recruiting and appointing Edina residents to serve who are currently not Park Board members. Park Board member Ellen Jones has volunteered to take the lead in this effort to recruit Park Board members and other Edina residents to serve on this Working Group. Included in this packet is a Press Release (Attachment A) for the Sun Newspaper to recruit volunteers. Member Ellen Jones has requested this item be placed on the August Park Board Agenda to update Park Board members of the progress. REPORURECOMMEN DATION To: EDINA PARK BOARD Agenda Item Item No. VI. B. From: John Keprios, Director Park and Recreation Department Action Discussion 0 Information Date: August 9, 2011 Subject: User Fees Working Group ACTION REQUESTED: No formal Park Board action is requested on this agenda item. This item is intended to update Park Board members on the status of the formation of the User Fees Working Group. INFORMATION/BACKGROUND: The City Council approved the Park Board's request to form a Working Group to study user fees and make recommendations to the City Council. The terminology "Work Group" is used here as opposed to "Committee" simply because the Park Board has expressed an interest in recruiting and appointing Edina residents to serve who are currently not Park Board members. Park Board member Ellen Jones has volunteered to take the lead in this effort to recruit Park Board members and other Edina residents to serve on this Working Group. Included in this packet is a Press Release (Attachment A) for the Sun Newspaper to recruit volunteers. Member Ellen Jones has requested this item be placed on the August Park Board Agenda to update Park Board members of the progress. 0 Contact: Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications & Marketing Director Phone 952-833-9520 • Fax 952-826-0389 • Web www.CityofEdina.com (ATTACHMENT A) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE PREISIS RELEASE Park Board seeks volunteers Edina, Minn., Aug. 2, 2011 — The Edina Park Board seeks volunteers for two new working groups. The Park Board recently established two working groups: • Donations and Naming Working Group. The working group will propose policies and procedures for naming and renaming City parks and facilities and accepting donations. The working group will meet from 12:30 to 1:30 p.m. the second and fourth Mondays in September and October. The first meeting will be Sept. 12, 2011. • User Fee Working Group. The working group will evaluate current fee scales and costs associated with facility use, while also developing policy that may be currently lacking for potential user groups. This working group likely will meet from 12:30 to 1:30 p.m. the first and third Wednesdays in September and October. Those residents interested in serving on a working group should write to edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us or call Janet Canton in the Edina Park & Recreation Department at 952-826-0435 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. Letters of interest can also be sent to Edina Park Board, Edina City Hall, 4801 W. 50th St., Edina, MN, 55424. Please indicate the working group(s) that is of greatest interest to you. -30- City of Edina o 4801 West 50th Street o, Edina, MN 55424 REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: EDINA PARK BOARD Agenda Item Item No. VI. C. From: John Keprios, Director Park and Recreation Department z Action F� Discussion F-1 Information Date: August 9, 2011 Subject: Sports Dome Study Committee ACTION REQUESTED: The Park Board is requested to appoint Park Board members to serve on a Sports Dome Study Committee and guide the process of conducting a public facility inventory and feasibility study of an indoor athletic facility. INFORMATION/BACKGROUND: At their July 19 Work Session, the City Council met with representatives of a group of residents who propose the construction of an indoor athletic facility, which has been commonly referred to as a "sports dome". The Council considered the proposal and agreed that it would be prudent to direct City staff to prepare a current inventory of public facilities owned and/or managed by the City of Edina, and to determine, through a feasibility study conducted under the guidance of the Park Board, if it is advisable for the City to support the construction of an indoor athletic facility. 11 At their August 3, 2011 meeting, the City Council approved the City Manager's recommendation to direct staff to conduct a feasibility study under the guidance of the Park Board and request that the Park Board make a recommendation to the City Council concerning the advisability of supporting the construction of an indoor athletic facility. The final deliverable to the City Council from the Park Board on this matter shall include recommendations on the following subjects: ownership, capital finance, operational management and finance, program and location(s). The Council acknowledges the complexity of this assignment and has agreed to allocate up to $20,000 for consulting costs associated with this task and has authorized the Park Board to establish, at its discretion, committees and subcommittees the Board believes are necessary to accomplish this task. Staff recommends that the Park Board establish a Sports Dome Study Committee to work closely with staff to guide the process of conducting a public facility inventory and feasibility study of an indoor athletic facility. Staff would recommend a minimum of two and a maximum of four Park Board members. • C� REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: EDINA PARK BOARD Agenda Item Item No. VI. D. From: John Keprios, Director Park and Recreation Department Action Discussion ❑ Information Date: August 9, 2011 Subject: 2012-2016 Capital Improvement Plans ACTION REQUESTED: Park Board is requested to review, discuss and ask questions about the proposed five- year (2012-2016) capital improvement plans for the Park and Recreation Department including all enterprise facilities except the Art Center. INFORMATION/BACKGROUND: Included in this packet are the five-year (2012-2016) capital improvement plans (CIP) for the Golf Course, Braemar Arena, Edina Aquatic Center, Centennial Lakes Park, Edinborough Park and the Park and Recreation Department as proposed by staff. These are five-year plans; however, funding is appropriated for only the upcoming year's plan, which in this case means for only the year 2012. Also included is a list of potential park improvements that are currently unfunded. The Edina Art Center is not included in this packet because the Edina Art Center Board makes CIP recommendations to the City Council specifically for the Art Center. We intend to have enterprise facility managers present at the September Park Board meeting to answer questions about their proposed CIP. The Park Board will be asked to make final recommendations on the proposed CIP at the September Park Board meeting. The Park Board is encouraged to share comments, ask questions and request further information of staff that may require further research in preparation for the September Park Board meeting. Page I City of Edina, MN 600,00o su,uuu bu,uuu bu,uuu Capital Improvement Plan 1,u0u,uvu 2012 thru 2016 (Arena PROJECTS & FUNDING SOURCES BY DEPARTMENT Department Project# Priority 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total (Aquatic Center 140,000 Flowrider AQC-03-001 n/a 430,000 n/a 60,000 430,000 Flowrider Completion AQC-12-001 n/a 100,000 60,000 Replace Zamboni A-10-004 100,000 Upgrades and Replacements AQC-12-002 n/a 70,000 140,000 70,000 Upgrades and Replacements AQC-12-003 n/a 50,000 n/a 125,000 35,000 50,000 Upgrades and Replacements AQC-12-004 n/a 50,000 Replace Zamboni ' A-12-001 50,000 Upgrades and Replacements AQC-12-005 n/a 140,000 60,000 60,000 Upgrades and Replacements AQC-12-006 n/a n/a 300,000 300,000 50,000 Aquatic Center Total 600,000 50,000 50,000 60,000 300,000 1,060,000 Aquatic Center Fund 600,000 50,000 50,000 60,000 300,000 1,060,000 Page I Aquatic Center Total 600,00o su,uuu bu,uuu bu,uuu suu,uuu 1,u0u,uvu (Arena Replace Zamboni A-09-002 n/a 140,000 140,000 Water System Repairs A-10-003 n/a 60,000 60,000 Replace Zamboni A-10-004 n/a 140,000 140,000 Parking Lot Resurfacing A-11-001 n/a 125,000 35,000 160,000 Replace Zamboni ' A-12-001 n/a 140,000 140,000 Make-up Water Tanks A-12-002 n/a 50,000 50,000 Arena Total 265,000 95,000 140,000 50,000 140,000 690,000 Construction Fund 265,000 95,000 140,000 50,000 140,000 690,000 Arena Total 265,000 95,000 140,000 50,000 140,000 690,000 Art Center Rebuild Kilns ART -11-003 n/a 15,000 15,000 Parking Lot Expansion ART -11-004 n/a 85,000 85,000 HVAC ART -11-005 n/a 22,800 22,800 Media Studio Updates ART -11-006 n/a 12,000 12,000 Repairs & Maintenance ART -12-001 n/a 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,000 Art Center Total 100,000 22,800 32,000 20,000 20,000 194,800 Page I Department Project# Priority 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Construction Fund 100,000 22,800 32,000 20,000 20,000 194,800 Art Center Total 220,000 47,000 82,000 45,000 394,000 100,000 22,800 32,000 20,000 20,000 194,800 Replaster Pool EP -00-017 n/a 70,000 70,000 Replace Carpeting EP -06-007 Centennial Lakes Park Replace HVAC Units CL -06-005 n/a 12,000 25,000 EP -08-007 25,000 Paint South Park Railings CL -08-003 n/a 28,000 12,000 Soft Play for Great Hall EP -08-011 28,000 Renovate Putting Greens CL -08-004 n/a 40,000 40,000 Pool and Wall Tile EP -08-021 40,000 Replace Cracked/Broken Concrete CL -08-005 n/a 12,000 80,000 Lift to Birthday Party Area EP -09-014 12,000 Add Restroom Facility CL -09-007 n/a 120,000 40,000 Track Floor EP -09-015 120,000 Replace Park Sound System CL -09-008 n/a 65,000 32,000 Concrete repairs EP -09-016 32,000 Replace Concrete CL -09-009 n/a 15,000 Adventure Peak Remodel EP -09-021 15,000 Floating Dock CL -10-004 n/a 25,000 12,000 EP -10-011 12,000 Security Camera System CL -10-005 n/a 30,000 30,000 25,000 EP -11-005 25,000 Centrum Planter Beds CL -10-006 n/a 65,000 20,000 EP -11-006 20,000 Paver Replacement CL -11-001 n/a 20,000 25,000 Exterior Entryway Doors EP -11-007 20,000 New Pickup CL -11-002 n/a 80,000 Interior Entryway Doors 25,000 25,000 Paver Replacement CL -11-003 n/a 60,000 Upstairs Restroom Remodel 20,000 20,000 Centennial Lakes Park Total 220,000 47,000 82,000 45,000 394,000 Construction Fund 220,000 47,000 82,000 45,000 394,000 Centennial Lakes Park Total 220,000 47,000 82,000 45,000 394,000 Edinborough Park Replaster Pool EP -00-017 n/a 70,000 70,000 Replace Carpeting EP -06-007 n/a 12,000 12,000 Security Camera System EP -08-007 n/a 12,000 12,000 Soft Play for Great Hall EP -08-011 n/a 40,000 40,000 Pool and Wall Tile EP -08-021 n/a 80,000 80,000 Lift to Birthday Party Area EP -09-014 n/a 40,000 40,000 Track Floor EP -09-015 n/a 65,000 65,000 Concrete repairs EP -09-016 n/a 125,000 125,000 Adventure Peak Remodel EP -09-021 n/a 25,000 25,000 North Sidewalk EP -10-011 n/a 30,000 30,000 Track Air Conditioning EP -11-005 n/a 65,000 65,000 Adventure Peak Wave Slide EP -11-006 n/a 25,000 25,000 Exterior Entryway Doors EP -11-007 n/a 80,000 80,000 Interior Entryway Doors EP -11-008 n/a 60,000 60,000 Upstairs Restroom Remodel EP -11-009 n/a 30,000 30,000 Adventure Peak Renovation EP -11-010 n/a 30,000 30,000 Lighting retrofit EP -12-001 n/a 35,000 35,000 Pool Boiler EP -12-002 n/a 12,000 12,000 Page 2 Department Project# Priority 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Park Boiler EP-12-003 n/a 25,000 25,000 Pond and Waterfall Renovation EP-12-004 n/a 20,000 20,000 Edinborough Park Total 200,000 215,000 174,000 162,000 130,000 881,000 Construction Fund 200,000 215,000 174,000 162,000 130,000 881,000 Edinborough Park Total 200,000 215,000 174,000 162,000 130,000 881,000 (Golf Course Golf Dome: Building Replacement GC-11-003 n/a 460,000 460,000 Braemar: Maintenance Equipment GC-12-001 n/a 135,000 145,000 155,000 155,000 0 590,000 Braemar: Miscellaneous Equipment GC-12-002 n/a 40,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 190,000 Golf Course Total 635,000 195,000 205,000 205,000 0 1,240,000 Golf Course Fund 635,000 195,000 205,000 205,000 1,240,000 Golf Course Total 635,000 195,000 205,000 205,000 1,240,000 Grand Total 2,020,000 624,800 683,000 542,000 590,000 4,459,800 Page 3 CD 0 o O_ o N O O O O CO <D TI O O O O O O O N O O O CO to w lei CDa O O O O O O O O N O O C ClCD le EA O rl 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N L 0 0 0 L 0 0 f— co M V V CO 00 00 U) fA O N O C6:) C6:) O O T 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N O O O O O Lir)N �- 00 CD 00 r- N r N CO to 69 N Cl) LO r O T O T O T O N N N N O O O c 0 v, O LL LL U- IL O m H W F— O F— O F— O O O F— F— F— F— Q OSS D O c: C O c O O NO O O C :3C Q N d c�II > U C:r i UNFUNDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PARK PROJECTS (Not shown in any order of priority) Arden Park: Replace warming house/shelter building $650,000 Highlands Park: Replace warming house/shelter building $650,000 Highlands Park: New pathway $500,000 Strachauer Park: Replace warming house/shelter building $650,000 Countryside Park: New outdoor hockey rink $60,000 Countryside Park: New warming house/shelter building $650,000 Countryside Park: Upgrade west baseball field $250,000 Pamela Park: Renovate/expand warming house $420,000 Unsupervised skate park $60,000 Tennis court lighting $10,000 Tennis court bang -boards $7,500 Additional landscaping (trees & shrubs) $400,000 TOTAL $4,307,500 0 JKeprios@ci.edina.mn.us I www.EdinaParks.com ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business -----Original Message ----- From: Felix Pronove[mailto:felixpronove@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 20112:22 PM To: John Keprios Cc: keeya.steel@yahoo.com; randyameyer@aol.com; ausdummer@gmail.com; wel2two@gmail.com; danlnan@aol.com; david.deeds@gmail.com; ellen.jones@mac.com; clarencebeeks@hotmail.com; Imsegreto@msn.com; morethanthislife@yahoo.com; tfronek@yahoo.com Subject: Park Board meeting tonight Hello Mr. Keprios and fellow Park Board members, Unfortunately I cannot make it to the Park Board meeting tonight. However, I have read the packet and thought I might share my observations from the viewpoint of a student. Working groups - I think working groups on naming rights and user fees sound like a good idea. About the Sports Dome idea - I know that as a high school student who likes to golf, play baseball, and play Ultimate Frisbee, that it is very hard to find field space in the spring (and winter, but it is definitely noticeable in March and April). The unpredictable condition of outdoor fields has meant that seasons get delayed, and a lot of practices and games are cancelled. It is very frustrating for spring sports participants. So having a domed facility would probably mean more time playing time for students in the spring. One option I hope will be considered is combining the existing golf dome with a covered field. About Capital Improvements and my experience as a high school student this year with Edina park facilities: I only visited the pool once, but I believe a lot of high school kids would visit the pool to use a flowrider while enjoying the pool. A lot of high school students use the frisbee golf course at Rosland. High school students use playground equipment to play night games like Blind Man's Bluff. High school students use the mini golf course at Centennial Lakes, but the price is kind of high. I also did not think the greens were in bad shape. can see that an additional restroom at Centennial Lakes would be nice. High school students love the free movies in the park on Thursdays. As an 18 year old, I golfed a lot at Braemar this summer because the youth fee includes 18 year olds, and that made it cheaper than other public courses. A lot of my friends got jobs working for city parks this winter and summer and I know many of them are very grateful that the city helps so many kids get good local jobs. I very much enjoyed serving on the Park Board this year and I am proud to live in a city that has such a great park system. Thank you, Felix Pronove A=COM ELLERBE BECKET M E E T I N G May 19, 2011 M I N U T E 5 PURPOSE: Edina Baseball Association /American Legion State Tournament 2013 DATE/TIME: April 4, 2011 @ 8:00 am LDCATIDN: Edina City Hall, Edina, MN ATTENDING: Vince Cockreil, John Keprios, Ed Macholda (City of Edina) Brad Burley, Mike Theis (Edina Baseball Association) John Labosky Robert Rothman (AECOM Ellerbe Becket) PRDJKT: Renovation of Braemar Park/ Garden Park baseball fields L The Edina Baseball Association (EBA) was selected to host the American Legion State Tournament in 2013 at Braemar Park. 2. Eden Prairie is hosting the 2011 American Legion State Tournament, and the Braemar Legion fields will be used on the first day of the tournament. 3. A number of ideas were mentioned as possible upgrades to be made at Braemar to get the park tournament ready: a. Park entry — desire for a more aesthetic and grand entry. b. Install ticket booth at the entry for control of admissions. c. More handicapped parking/access required. Ability to transport seniors down the hill. d. Provide safety netting for spectators. e. Add Edina Baseball history features to concession stand — Edina Baseball Shrinc. 4. A number of ideas were mentioned as possible upgrades to be made at Bracmar to get the baseball fields tournament ready: a. Field 1: current Legion field i. Install new/improved lighting. ii. Extend home dugout roof (3`d base) to provide cover for announcers. b. Field 2: i. Possible addition of tall Icft field wall for safety of players and spectators near the batting cages. C. Field 3: this would be the primary field used for the tournament. i. Expand grass infield for 90' bases. ii. Increase fences to 330' at the foul poles and 375' to center. iii. Provide hillside seating. iv. Provide scoreboard. v. Install lighting. Edina Baseball Association May 17, 2011 vi. Upgrade sound system. vii. Increase spectator searing between first base and third base. d. Field 4: i. No improvements 5. After visiting the fields, expanding field 3 to 330' at the right field foul pole is probably not feasible due to the location of the service road. There is no room to move the road west to allow the field to expand. In lieu of that option, a tall right field wall / scoreboard could be built... think "green monster". 6. Increasing the distance to the outfield fences on field 3 will require extensive excavation into the hill with retaining walls. 7. The expansion of field 3 would provide much greater opportunities for Babe Ruth / High School / Legion teams but would there be any reduced field capacity for younger players? Mike Theis will provide Park and Recreation officials with a summary of current EBA teams, number of games played and field size requirements. 8. A number of ideas were also mentioned as possible upgrades to be made at Garden Park: a. Install dugouts. b. Install batting cages. 4. There are currently bad subsoils at Garden Park that do not allow the field to drain properly. This issue will need to be addressed. 10. It may be helpful to visit other Twin Cities baseball fields to better understand the current competition and generate ideas for facility improvements. (e.g., Minnetonka provisions for handicapped spectators from their parking lot) 11. The concept design for facilities improvements including construction costs and schedules will be reviewed by the meeting participants and the EBA Board. The broader public will need to be educated on the need for facility improvements and a strong consensus reached to support a call to action for a public / private partnership to raise the needed funds for facility enhancements. Recognize that this project may be competing with other local projects for funding support. These notes constitute the writer's understanding of items discussed, decisions reached and actions required; please contact the writer within three business days with any corrections. 0 Q)0 McG0XJGH ' Building for the Next Generatf•n Edina Baseball Association Edina, dina, MN Project: Braemar Baseball Complex Estimate By: EH Architect: AECOM Date: 07/08/11 Budgets Estimate: Preliminary 9Totals T UnitPay • DescriptionItem Code 60,000.00 60,000 3 Park U rades 1 allow 0 3a Park Entry Enhancements 0.00 Landscape, Hardscape, &Signage Upgrades 0.00 014,400 192 sf 75.00 3b INew Ticket Boo0.00 0 --Loth 75lsf 0 16' x 12' Lockable enclosure w/ Electricity @ $ 0.00 NOTE: a much larger bldg. shown on site plan. 0.00 0 d / Access Parking 18.00 5,760 3c Handicapped 320 sy 4,480 New gravel entry road - 240'x 12' 249 sy 18.00 New gravel parking lot ( 40' x 56') g ea 150.00 1,200 0 Special Signage 0.00 0 .00 Priced as part of "Larger" site package 0 0 Assumes clearing & extra prep required. 0.00 Asphalt would be additional +/- $10/sY 0.00 0 0.00 0 00 150,000 750 , 18 . 3d Safety netting for spectators g ea 0 Avg. Length - 250'x 45' high - Non Retrackable @ $75/If 0.00 0.00 Add $15/If for retrackable (this is recommended) 0 S 25,000 1 allow 25,000.00 0 3e Edina Baseball Shrine 0.00 0 Allowance 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 4 Baseball Field Upgrades 0.00 0 a. Field #1 160,000.00 160,000 1 allow 40,000 Lighting: ( all pricing is from Musco) 1 allow 40,000.00 New wiring & switchgear1 allow 2,500.00 2,500 0 Extend dugout w/ electrical for announcers 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 b. Field #2100 It 50.00 5,000 Protection netting @ Batting Cages (100 If) 0.00 0 Field #2 Lighting Upgrade - $103k - $123k - 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 sr. DAot 375% �AtRYIiW AVM- N. ST. DAV 1, NN SSI13 T 651.633.5°5° r 651.6;1.5673 0.0a:N lST BR )SSS NINTH 9T. NW. SUITZ 100 ROC HOSTY l, INN 555101 1 507.576• 107-536.+"7 fH08N1X 4730 •• COTTON )55 L 1",r SUITY 100 DHO iNIX. AZ E50� T 603.533•`!897 f 603.533.1843 AALIC- NO. IWc308540 Edina BaseballPaget oft •. Association Project: Braemar Baseball Complex Arcnitect: AECOM Estirnate: Preliminary Prelimina Budgets Location: Edina, MN • Estimate By: EH Date: 07/08/11 C. Field #t3 Lighting: ( all pricing is from Musco) • New wiring & switchgear allow10.00 0 Revise infield 7 150,000.00 allow 150,000 7,850 New outfield fencing (New extenions + st 30,000.00 30,000 new HR fence) 700 Hillside seating - scope unknown ? 3.50 If 27,475 Scoreboard (Daktronic) 1 17.00 allow 11,900 Upgrade sound system (this is for 4 fields) 1 15,000.00 allow 15,00o Increase seating on 1st & 3rd base lines79.000.00 1 -scope ?? allow 15,000.00 19,000 2 Garden Park allow 10,000.00 15,000 20,000 Dug -outs CMU walls w/ Wood Framed Roof 0.00 0 Batting Cages 20.00 0 Scoreboard (Daktronic)12,000.00 2 ea 24,000 Sitework / Field Drainage / Misc. 7 (scope undefined) ea 70,000.00 allow 16,000.00 20,000 7 allow 75,000.00 16,000 75,000 Other Potentional Scope. 0.00 0 Field #3 - Extend field to 975 0.00 0 Excavate into hill &modular block retaining 0 00 0 Verifyy 9 wall 1 exact) how much this extends to the South into the hill. "Green Monster" may 0.00 allow 200,000.00 0 200,000 y be more economical. Batting Cages: 0.00 approx. $1Ok ea. Field #4 Lighting U 0.00 0 pgrades: $70k - $90k 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 • •,�� • "` - r Miscellaneous 0.00 0 Costs General Conditions (8%) General Liabili Insurance 1,091,715 % 0.00 0 „. 0.9500% 0.08 87,337 1,176 052.20 11,201 Fees &Contin enc • Design Contingency Construction Contingency 10.00% $119,025.32 CM/GC Fee 5.00% $119,025 $65,463.93 Design Fees 3.00% $65,464 — $41,242.27 $41,242 .. . • • $40,000.00 $40,000 SE DAUL 3777 •AIRY/EN' AYE. N. ST. PAUL, A(N EA 7155 N1 15117 r 6 RO�I'•iTN7H 9T. NW SUIrY 100 ROC3/EErYR, AIN S1.631•Sogo ► 651.677.5677 iHOBM/Y 472o B. COTTON GIN LOO^ SUITE loo VHOENI Y, AZ d So40 r 6oa.ta3. r 5"516.48?o r So7.Sl6.4867 9897 8 601431.1843 Al LIC. NO. ROC30$540 ate,: it I Al AI �r !,4! •.{!, � x ':_ �:�! j �--- .. -.-- ... r 1 rte`"^--V�� �, r , r rF f �' y fi,F ra ```��ppp���±±± � ;. `� i f t , • ,w.. k . afy r P• 1 , � �j''i� � i\y ; ^AIT:. «".4 •�' /"�,:� "s "Y`-�. f''• fpr y � t yam-.". �/ r i. Y: _ � ,. i1 q i , ♦ `� 1 $a r n 1, - Bonestroo 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 551 13 .� Rosene Office: 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 Anderlik & www.bonestroo.com Associates Engineers & Architects December 15, 2005 Howard Merriam, ASLA Director of Resource and Park Planning City of Northfield 801 Washington Street Northfield, MN 55057 (507) 645-3002 Dear Howard, It is with great pleasure that I am sending you this completed Natural Resource Inventory for the City of Northfield and the associated Urban Expansion Area. The citizens and city leaders of Northfield have some very good natural resources in the community. As the City moves forward, there will be many opportunities to apply the information in this Natural Resources Inventory. It can provide a solid foundation for the proactively managing for sustainable growth as the city grows, help with the creation of alternate development strategies, identify priority areas for conservation, and more. Most importantly, however, is its potential to help Northfield retain the character that has made it such an attractive, appealing place to live for the past 150 years. On behalf of all of us at Bonestroo Natural Resources who worked on this project, thank you for the opportunity to assist you on this project. We wish you well on the successful application of the natural resource data. I have truly enjoyed the opportunity to work with you on this project and look forward to visiting Northfield as the city moves forward. Sincerely, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK, AND ASSOCIATES Elizabeth Gould Project Ecologist • St. Paul, St. Cloud, Rochester, MN ■ Milwaukee, WI ■ Chicago, IL Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned i Executive Summary The Northfield Natural Resource Inventory (NRI) was undertaken in response to the significant growth and development pressures that the city is facing as the Twin Cities metropolitan area expands and outlying areas develop. City and staff recognized that effective planning considers all of the resources of the community, including natural areas and open space, and successfully balances growth with the preservation of key natural resources, and moved proactively to conduct the NRI. This inventory was designed to assess the natural areas and open space areas within the project area in order to help guide current and future planning efforts. In February 2005, the City of Northfield retained Bonestroo Natural Resources (Bonestroo and Associates) to complete Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) Mapping and a Natural Resource Inventory (NRI) on all lands within the city and Urban Expansion Area (collectively referred to as the "Project Area"). In addition to completing the MLCCS mapping and natural resources inventory, the project goals also included a brief review of the streams within the project area, assessment of wildlife habitat, and identification of any rare or unique features. Fieldwork began in June 2005, with a detailed inventory of the Hauberg Woods area. The bulk of the fieldwork was completed in July and August 2005, after the completion of landowner notification. In all, 10,207 acres were mapped, representing 79 different cover types ranging from impervious surfaces with pavement and buildings to a rare, high quality rich fen (a type of wetland) community. Of these 10,207 acres, 3,758 acres were mapped as containing some amount of impervious surface, 750 acres as maintained areas (mainly lawn and park areas), and 3736 acres as cropland. The remaining 1963 acres were mapped as open space, including remnant natural communities such as oak forests, and semi -natural areas such as retired pastures, early successional wooded communities and altered forests. High quality natural areas and unique features occur throughout the project area, but are concentrated along the stream and river corridors. The best quality natural areas documented in this study include: Rich fen at Hauberg Woods (also listed as a unique feature) • • High quality floodplain forests along the Cannon River • Good quality maple -basswood and oak forests along the stream corridors, especially Heath Creek Some of the unique features noted include: • Rich fen at Hauberg Woods • Spring Brook (This site is of regional significance, as it is the only Trout Stream in Rice County, and is an uncommon resource type in southern Minnesota) • Limestone Cliffs along Heath Creek • Numerous scenic overlooks along the stream corridors and in some outlying areas • Cannon River (which is itself a state Wild and Scenic River) Finally, another category of interest is areas where there is a concentration of natural areas and/or open space. These areas are of high value ecologically, provide excellent wildlife habitat, and have potential to create recreation opportunities. Within the project area, these areas are defined in two ways: one, by the stream and river corridors of Heath Creek, Spring Brook, Spring Creek, and the Cannon River. Second, the campuses of St Olaf and Carleton Colleges also support important concentrations of open space, which have high ecological value due both to their overall size and the significant efforts that the colleges are making to restore and manage existing native habitat. IV As the City moves forward, there are many opportunities to apply the information from this NRI. First and foremost, it provides foundation information for managing sustainable growth in Northfield. Incorporating this information into the planning process can help prioritize areas where conservation, alternative development strategies, conventional development, or other approaches may be appropriate. Two specific tools include using the data as the foundation for developing a greenways corridor system, and incorporating the information into local ordinance. Other options are available as well. These and other tactics are becoming increasingly successful as communities around the country recognize the many aesthetic, ecological, and economic benefits of a smart -growth approach. In addition to these benefits, however, natural areas are an important part of providing identity to the places we live. They contribute to the quality of life, and provide a sense of place for each of us. The information collected in this NRI will be an important part of understanding what activities and land uses the landscape can support, while preserving natural areas that define the landscape for Northfield residents.