Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-06-08 Park Board Packet11 City of Edina EDINA PARK BOARD TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004 7:00 P.M. SOUTH METRO TRAINING FACILITY 7525 Braemar Boulevard (Pre -meeting tour begins at 6:30 p.m.) AGENDA *1. Approval of Tuesday, May 11, 2004, Park Board Minutes. *2. Duckweed Removal On Highlands Park Pond — Jon Barnett. *3. Tobacco -Free Presentation — Kathy Iverson, Edina Chemical Health Coordinator. *4. Facilities Recommendations (Gymnasiums and Dome) - Staff. 5. Park Assignments Presentation — Jeff Johnson. 6. Other. *7. Adjournment. *These are agenda items that require or request Park Board action. City Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424-1394 Park and Recreation Department www.cityofedina.com 952-826-0367 FAX 952-826-0385 TTY 952-826-0379 Memo To: Edina Park Board. From: John Keprios, Director Edina Park and Recreation Department Date: June 4, 2004 Re: TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004, PARK BOARD MEETING STAFF REPORT. Enclosed you should find the following items: 1. Tuesday, June 8, 2004, Park Board Agenda. 2. Tuesday, May 11, 2004, Park Board Minutes. 3. Letter from Edina resident Wayne A. Hergott. 4. Letter from DNR Area Fisheries Supervisor Daryl Ellison. 5. Resolution from Edina Community Health Committee. 6. Email from Edina resident Paul N. Green. 7. Email from Park Board member Floyd Grabiel. 8. Braemar Dome financial data from 2001 Referendum. The following is the monthly staff report concerning each item on the agenda with the exception of Approval of the Minutes and Other. "Other" is listed on the agenda for other information items (not requiring formal action), last minute items that may come up between now and the Park Board meeting, plus, cover any other concerns of Park Board members and/or attendees. PARK BOARD MEETING AT SOUTH METRO TRAINING FACILITY The Tuesday, June 8, 2004, Park Board meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m., in the Wippermann Room at the South Metro Training Facility at 7525 Braemar Boulevard. There will be a tour of the South Metro Training Facility at 6:30 p.m. conducted by Kevin Kelliher, Facility Manager. The facility is located just south of Braemar Arena. If you are unable to attend, please call either Office Coordinator, Janet Canton, at 826-0435 or me at 826- 0430. DUCKWEED REMOVAL ON HIGHLANDS PARK POND - JON BARNETT As shown in Wayne Hergott's letter, neighbors who reside near Highlands Park Pond are requesting that the City support the request for a permit from the Minnesota DNR to apply chemicals in the pond to control duckweed. Staff has denied the request; however, the residents wish to further pursue the matter through the Park Board/City Council process. Mr. Jon Barnett will be in attendance to speak on behalf of the Highlands Park Pond neighborhood. I have been informed that Mr. Hergott cannot attend the June Park Board meeting. Mr. Hergott's letter refers to the 40 lakes and ponds where spraying is currently allowed by the City and the Minnesota DNR. None of the these 40 lakes and ponds are scenarios where the City owns the shoreline all the way around the body of water. As a matter of past practice, we have never chemically treated a lake or pond where the City owns the lakeshore all the way around the body of water. As a matter of practice, the City has never treated Highlands Park Pond with any aquacides. It is true that Highlands Park Pond does develop a green carpet of duckweed growth annually that becomes an aesthetic issue for neighboring residents. The duckweed growth actually provides healthy nutrition for waterfowl and fish. Unfortunately, duckweed is very difficult to eradicate by chemical treatments, which typically result in only partial control as stated in Daryl Ellison's letter. •According to Daryl Ellison, the Minnesota DNR is not going to approve a permit request for chemical control of duckweed if the only reason for removal is aesthetic. If the purpose to control duckweed is due to its impeding recreational use, such as boating or swimming, then the DNR will consider issuing a permit. Because the City owns all of the shoreline property around the entire body of water, the City must apply for the duckweed control permit regardless of who pays for the control. It has been staff's observations through the years that the body of water is rarely used for boating purposes and never used for swimming purposes. Clearly the main reason behind the neighborhood request is aesthetics, which the Minnesota DNR would likely reject any request for chemical treatment for just that purpose. It is staff's opinion that treatment of City -owned lakes and ponds for primarily aesthetic reasons is bad practice and bad policy. Therefore, it is staff's recommendation to deny the neighborhood's request to control duckweed on the City's Highland Park Pond. If the Park Board chooses to control duckweed on Highlands Park Pond, staff would recommend limiting control to mechanical removal of duckweed and not permit the use of aquacides for primarily environmental purposes. Formal Park Board action is requested on this agenda item. TOBACCO -FREE PRESENTATION - KATHY IVERSON, EDINA CHEMICAL HEALTH COORDINATOR At the May 11 Park Board meeting, Kathy Iverson stated that she would like to give a formal presentation to the Park Board at the June 8th meeting on the topic of tobacco use in our outdoor park settings and particularly during events when children are present. She and others plan to inform the Park Board about what other communities are doing with regard to a tobacco free policy in outdoor park areas. Please know that I have invited Edina Police Chief Mike Siitari to attend the Park Board meeting to address the questions about enforcement. Staff is recommending that we continue to support and promote voluntary enforcement of a tobacco -free policy established by youth athletic associations. At the time of this Staff Report, I have still not heard back one way or another from all youth athletic associations. It is my intention to follow up and get an answer one way or another after the Park Board has responded to this group's request on June 81h Formal Park Board action may be requested on this agenda item. FACILITIES RECOMMENDATIONS (GYMNASIUMS AND DOME) - STAFF First I must apologize for not getting any preliminary recommendations to the Park Board via email prior to this Staff Report. For a number of reasons, such as a weeklong vacation, conducting over 20 interviews, and a variety of other pressing issues that have surfaced, I have been unable to devote much time to this matter. Even so, I have been giving the matter a lot of thought and consideration that leads me to the following recommendations. As per the Park Board's request, I have looked into the status of the General Motors Parts facility and learned that the facility is still not for sale on the open market. Please know that the Edina City Council has scheduled a joint meeting with the Edina School Board for Tuesday, June 15, 2004. There will likely be discussion about the school district's bus garage and athletic facilities. I will inform the Park Board of the results of that meeting. 2 DOME: If the Park Board feels that it is in the best interest of the community to build an indoor multi-purpose athletic field on city -owned property, then the only realistic viable option at this point in time is to locate it at the Braemar multi-purpose athletic field located next to Braemar Arena. If that is the case, then I also strongly believe that the best and most realistic option is to place an inflatable fabric dome (bubble) facility that is 370' x 180' in dimension. I am not recommending a permanent facility structure at this time for the following reasons: • The additional costs for a permanent building would make the project too expensive, more difficult to attain through fund-raising efforts or by referendum in the short term. • A larger permanent building significantly alters the visual character of the entire park area. • If an indoor athletic field facility is found to be no longer valued or no longer financially feasible to operate in the distant future, the community can simply choose to no longer put the bubble and not suffer the loss of a more significant investment (much less financial risk involved). Regarding location, it is staff's opinion that there is no other viable option on land that the city currently owns. There are arguably other park locations; however, none of those locations, in my opinion, would likely survive the public process for approval. The only other option that, in my opinion, could be considered only if this need becomes critically important to meet (including the need for additional outdoor athletic field space) is to convert the new nine -hole Braemar Golf Course property into alternative athletic field use, including a dome. Over a million dollars is being requested in the near future to alter the new nine golf course because it is too challenging for most recreational golfers and has too many steep inclines to negotiate for the senior population who choose not to pay for a golf cart. As you may or may not recall, the new nine -holes at Braemar Golf Course required the elimination of a large multi-purpose athletic field, an archery range, a paddle tennis court, and a significant alteration to the nature path. Please know that I am not suggesting this as a viable alternative at this time. If there ever comes a time in the future when golf is no longer as popular and financially solvent, the citizens might want to consider converting some of Braemar Golf Course back to other outdoor athletic field uses. There is obviously a considerable amount of financial investment into the current golf course, which makes it, in my view, unreasonable to make such a change at this time. This is simply a response to the Park Board's request to consider "all options" regarding city -owned land. The enclosed copy from Anderson -Johnson Associates shows the financial estimates (based on 2001 dollars) for construction of a bubble at the Braemar Arena site. With inflation, the estimate is probably closer to approximately $2.5 million for construction costs, which does not include any restroom facilities. It would be my recommendation that any bubble structure include restroom and concessions facilities, which would likely bring the total cost of construction to close to $3 million. Based on 2001 estimates from KKE Architects and 2004 estimates from Yeadon Company (vendor who manufactures and sells bubbles) the operational expenses for a bubble facility of this size would cost between $165,000 and $200,000 per year. Expenses include take down, set-up, storage, custodial and program staff, utilities, grounds maintenance and snow removal. In my opinion, there appears to be only three ways to finance this project in a manner that will be acceptable to the City Council. One would be to get enough up -front funding from user groups through donations to fund at least 50% of the cost of construction plus an additional $500,000 in donations to use to cover the cost of operational expenses that exceed user fee revenues. In my opinion, if user groups were to come up with $2 million towards the purchase and operation of this facility, I believe that it would gain the support of the City Council to issue bonds to construct the facility at Braemar Park. Another means of financing this facility would be to go to a referendum for the construction of the facility, as well as a referendum question on the ballot to approve an excess levy to subsidize operational expenses that exceed user fee revenues. The third and final option that might be acceptable to the City Council would be to offer a referendum for only the construction of the facility only if user groups come up with at least $500,000 to be used to cover operational expenses that exceed user fee revenues. Just exactly how much revenue such a facility could generate is still an unknown. With more bubble facilities being built in more surrounding communities each year, the ability to generate revenue from non-resident use continues to diminish. To get a bubble facility built on city -owned property with the least amount of further delay, Braemar Arena is in my view the best and only site that should be considered at this point in time. GYMNASIUMS: The concept of building and operating gymnasiums on city -owned property in the near future is, in my opinion, not an option. As you may recall, this was also the unanimous view of the Facilities Study Committee in their most recent memo of recommendations. In staff's opinion, there are no reasonable locations on any city -owned property to even consider construction and operation of gymnasium facilities: Such a facility would require either displacement of an existing athletic field space or conversion of parkland that is already used for another purpose that • would prove to be politically challenging to convert into gymnasium use. The field user groups have already stated that they are willing to compromise the width of the Braemar multi-purpose athletic field for the sake of having a bubble facility during their off-season. A multi- purpose flooring concept that could allow for both basketball and soccer type uses at an indoor bubble facility would not be realistic mainly because: Both user groups would want the space at the same time (same reason why the golf dome cannot serve both needs). A common floor surface for both would be less attractive to the field use sports. Having a movable floor surface would likely be too expensive and impractical. Even if funding for construction and operation of gymnasiums on city -owned property were to be approved by referendum, there still is no reasonable location today to build and operate gymnasiums on city -owned property. It should not be considered as an option on any currently city -owned park property. Construction of gymnasiums on currently city -owned property would have to result in the displacement or conversion of an existing park use whether it be athletic field use, nature trails, open green space for general park use, tennis courts, or a number of other park uses. Even the thought of building into an existing hillside at Braemar Park is not reasonable due to the shortage of parking. We are completely land -locked, fully developed and out of additional undeveloped space suitable for such a facility. If the School District insists on not adding any more gymnasiums to their existing facilities, then the only remaining option is to wait until a private facility in Edina becomes available for purchase and then ask the City Council for their support at that time. 4 PARK ASSIGNMENTS PRESENTATION- JEFF JOHNSON Park Board member and School Board Representative Jeff Johnson has been assigned three parks to visit and make recommendations for short and long-term improvements: 1. Bredesen Park 2. Heights Park 3. Lewis Park Mr. Johnson will be giving a presentation on his needs assessment findings to the Park Board. OTHER This is an opportunity for Park Board members and residents to address other concerns. 5 EDINA PARK BOARD 7:00 P.M. EDINA SENIOR CENTER SHERWOOD ROOM MAY 11, 2004 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mike Damman, George Klus, Linda Presthus, Karla Sitek, Jeff Sorem, Alice Hulbert, Andy Finsness, Jeff Johnson MEMBERS ABSENT: Allyson Grande, Mike Weiss, Floyd Grabiel STAFF PRESENT: John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton, Donna Tilsner OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Olson, Doug Nessan, Greg Ettinger, John Ratelle, Bill Sierks, Idelle Longman, Dick Ward, Mark Copman, Kathy Iverson, Shirley Hunt Alexander I. APPROVAL OF THE TUESDAY, APRIL 13, 2004 PARK BOARD MINUTES Karla Sitek MOVED TO APPROVE THE APRIL 13, 2004 PARK BOARD MINUTES. Andy Finsness SECONDED THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED. II. TOBACCO -FREE POLICY Mr. Klus indicated that at the June Park Board meeting they will be discussing the tobacco free policy. He noted that Kathy Iverson, Chemical Health Coordinator for the City of Edina and Shirley Hunt Alexander, member of the Chemical Health Partnership of Edina are here to plant a few thoughts in our minds before the next Park Board meeting. Ms. Iverson first stated that she would like to commend the Park Board and John Keprios for the work they are doing in looking at this issue. Ms. Iverson explained that this initiative is about the voluntary compliance of tobacco free parks and they are looking at that during youth athletic activities. She noted that this initiative will begin the process of bringing consistency in Edina to their children in terms of the message they are giving them regarding tobacco use. Ms. Iverson pointed out that a child who plays basketball is not exposed to this because all schools are tobacco free. However, for a child who plays soccer, baseball, etc., tobacco use is allowed. Therefore, they are trying to bring some consistency to athletics by adopting a healthy parks policy. Ms. Iverson indicated that at the June meeting they will show the Park Board what it is that other communities around them are doing as well as explore this issue further. Mr. Klus informed the athletic association presidents that if they would like to attend next month's Park Board meeting or send a representative from their association the Park Board would be happy to hear their thoughts. III. YOUTH ATHLETIC ASSOCIATIONS PRESIDENTS Mr. Klus explained that the Park Board felt it was important for the presidents and representatives from the different athletic associations and clubs to be here tonight to talk about facilities and uses within Edina. He indicated that they need to talk about what the next step is if there is a next step. He noted that at the end of tonight they may find that there is nothing more that the city is going to be able to do to help in this situation. He stated that it may be a situation where the associations are going to have to take the next step with the school. Mr. Klus asked everyone to identify themselves and state which association they are with. The following were present: Richard Olson (Edina Soccer Association); Greg Ettinger (Edina Football Association); Doug Nessan (Edina Football Association); John Ratelle (Edina Baseball Association); Dick Ward (Edina Basketball Association); (Bill Sierks (Edina Girls Basketball); Mark Copman (Edina Soccer Club). Mr. Klus stated that because the youth sports are growing so fast there is a real need for more facilities and playing fields. He explained that the Park Board has made several recommendations over the years as well as they have looked at a lot of different options and at one time or another, the City Council has turned those recommendations down. However, twice in the last year the City Council has asked the Park Board to give them a recommendation on what to do for facilities. Specifically, they are looking for some type of indoor facility that could have a multi -number of different uses. Mr. Klus stated that twice now they have basically made the same recommendation to the City Council in regards to the findings by the Facilities Study Committee. He explained that the Facilities Study Committee was made up of Karla Sitek, Mike Damman, Andy Finsness and himself as well as with John Keprios and Ed MacHolda. Mr. Klus indicated that the Facilities Study Committee believes that there is a strong desire for an indoor athletic facility which will not diminish in the foreseeable future. Mr. Klus stated that it continues to be the Facilities Study Committee's recommendation that an indoor athletic field facility should be located on school property. Mr. Klus pointed out that if you look around at other communities they have all built facilities in conjunction with their schools. Mr. Klus gave a few reasons as to why the Facilities Study Committee feels this way. He noted that it would allow for easier access for students during the school day to maximize its use. They did not want to recommend to the City Council that they build a building that's going to sit empty all day and only be used in the evenings. Also, it makes the most sense from an operation standpoint. Mr. Klus commented that Edina is much more landlocked than a lot of other communities. He also stated that of all of the facilities they have looked at in the area none of them operate at a surplus. Mr. Klus pointed out that they also feel it would eliminate all of the additional expenses to convert another grass field into an artificial turf field. Mr. Klus informed the Park Board that Mr. Keprios and the City Manager Gordon Hughes recently met with school staff regarding facilities. At that meeting, Athletic Director Steve Dove stated that the school is not interested in a dome facility because the 2 school has all of the athletic facilities that they need today. There is no need for additional athletic facilities because they are servicing their students with the facilities they have and are able to meet their curriculum needs. Mr. Klus noted that basically what the school said is that they are not interested. Mr. Klus explained that an Edina resident has stepped forward who is willing to make quite a substantial donation to help build some type of indoor facility/bubble somewhere in this community. He noted that they have discussed the possibility of putting it at Braemar Park behind the Arena and talked about some of the different options. Mr. Klus stated that they have also discussed the possibility of going back and talking to the school. He noted that it's his understanding that there has been a lot of discussion about getting rid of the huts on the south end of the community center. He indicated that the huts are used quite a bit with after school activities as well as storage. Therefore, they are thinking about possibly talking to the schools about building some type of multi -use facility on that site. Mr. Klus pointed out that if the City were to look at building a facility at Braemar they still have the operational expenses issue. It would still be a building that's going to sit empty and therefore, they are going to have to look at user fees and see if they can afford to pay for it. He noted that they also may be able to go back and raise some funds for operations to help offset that. Mr. Klus explained that is what they did in Minnetonka, they had to raise operation money before they were allowed to build behind the high school. Mr. Klus stated that they know there are always going to be issues with funding. Mr. Klus indicated that right now the school is very focused on curriculum and nothing outside of that. He noted that it has been very frustrating because they are not sure where to go from here and therefore they would like some feedback from the athletic associations. He stated that he doesn't think there is much more the Park Board can do. Mr. Klus voiced that he feels there is going to have to be more community involvement from the associations and clubs if they are going to get things done in this community in the future. Mr. Keprios again informed everyone of the property at 7300 Bush Lake Road and noted that option is not completely dead although he is not confident that the parties involved have looked deeply enough into the deed restriction. Therefore, it's still in motion and he will keep the Park Board updated on what develops. Mr. Keprios indicated that the Southdale YMCA site is not an option. Ms. Presthus asked what happened to the GM Parts property to which Mr. Keprios replied that he doesn't know where that stands at the present. Mr. Ratelle commented that it seems to him that the GM property would be the perfect location for a facility. He noted that it already has a large structure that could probably handle a lot of indoor courts as well as a large outdoor area. He stated that it has a lot to offer as well as it has good access right off the freeway. Ms. Presthus indicated that regarding the huts at the community center the plan is to just eliminate them and do nothing else, which is a very unpopular decision among the Community Education Board. She explained that she sits on that board as the Park Board liaison and noted that she thinks there needs to be some dialog on how the community feels because they would definitely need community support if anything were to be done there. Ms. Presthus stated that she is not part of the Facilities Study Committee and noted that she is a little concerned with the recommendation where it states "Based on the failed referendum of 2001, it is the Facilities Study Committee's recommendation that the City of Edina should not enter into any future referendum that proposes to build gymnasiums on School District property." She commented that she is not sure how she should take that because we want it on school property but yet it can't be done through a referendum which means funding should come from another source. Is that what the intention of that is. Mr. Klus replied that for a referendum to be done to put buildings on school property it would have to be a school referendum, it could not come from the city. Ms. Presthus stated that she thinks that needs to be clarified. Mr. Ratelle commented that speaking from the Edina Baseball Association's perspective they are short fields and that's partially due to the construction that is going on over at the Community Center. He noted that they are struggling with trying to find fields for all of their age groups as well as they are seeing an increase in demand for their associations and they definitely need a source of fields. Mr. Ratelle explained that one of the ideas they have is to approach the School regarding the baseball field that is at Valley View Middle School because it is in very rough shape. He stated that it wouldn't cost a lot of money to get that field back into use and the Baseball Association is willing to do that. Mr. Ratelle indicated that he has had several conversations with Mr. Keprios and one thing that was relayed to him is that the athletic associations do take precedence over the schools and asked if that is something that they should look at pressing the issue with. He noted that they could tell the schools that the associations are going to use Braemar and all of the other fields that they want and are going to kick them off unless they participate. Mr. Ratelle pointed out that the Baseball Association has donated approximately $7,500 to $10,000 to help the High School with their program and they feel it's probably appropriate that they recognize that and that they continue to support their program because they are inter -related. Mr. Ratelle stated that the success of the Baseball Association is ultimately the success of the school's program. Therefore, he thinks a cooperative effort is really in line and so from their perspective they have a field shortage that they need to deal with. Mr. Ratelle explained that the second thing is that because the winters are so long they can't start baseball until fairly late in the season where a lot of the other communities who have domes are able to start practicing and hold try -outs a lot earlier. He noted that they scramble just to get try -out times at either Eden Prairie or Holy Angels. He noted that this year they ended up having try -outs on a Sunday afternoon and by not being able to have an appropriate try -out process they get a lot of heat from the parents that there weren't enough try -outs, it wasn't appropriate, the right kids weren't being picked, etc., rd and those are the kinds of things that they are constantly dealing with. Mr. Ratelle pointed out that they are trying to be as cooperative as they can and noted that when Kids Club came to the Baseball Association and asked if we could try and facilitate all of the kids they have in their program who are playing baseball they made a special effort to accommodate them. He stated that he thinks the School also needs to step up and recognize that the Baseball Association does feed their system and that they can bring in facilities that they have under their control into being part of an overall community support effort. Mr. Ettinger stated that the Edina Football Association's charter is written that they support all football in the community which includes grade 2 through high school. He indicated that the Football Association has donated approximately one million dollars over the last 8 to 10 years to the City and School. Mr. Ettinger stated the their football season is short but as an organization they take the viewpoint that they are all Edina kids no matter what sport they play and therefore they need to support the community and added that they are very much in favor of increasing athletic fields. He explained that this year and over the next few years they are feeling the pinch of the school referendum. The Football Board feels that losing the middle field between the community center and South View is a terrible thing to do especially when they are going to use that green space for parking when other alternatives are out there. Mr. Ettinger stressed that green space is a big issue in this town and they are very supportive of whatever it takes in order to help their kids stay busy and active. Mr. Nessan commented that he thinks for football a dome would have limited use, however, it could certainly help baseball, soccer, basketball, lacrosse, etc. He noted that he agrees with Mr. Ettinger that whatever can be done to facilitate this he is supportive of it. Mr. Nessan stated that if someone is willing to put money towards this how wonderful is that. The only question would be where do you locate it. Mr. Ettinger responded that personally he thinks that a dome belongs next to a school to maximize its use. He added that it's not in the curriculum now, however, it could certainly help with what goes on with the School. Mr. Ward indicated that the need hasn't change arguably in ten years. He noted that their demand continues to grow for boys basketball from 1st grade up to 9th grade. He stated that he has heard two things. First, these facilities don't make any money and second it's not the school's problem. Mr. Ward pointed out that the school doesn't run any basketball programs or indoor court sport programs until high school. Therefore, the associations have the challenge to serve the community because the demand is there which makes it the Basketball Association's problem and not the schools. Mr. Ward stated that they have to look at this not as a money making opportunity but as some kind of a community asset that's going to serve the needs today and tomorrow. He noted that he doesn't have any good solutions but they need to find a solution and figure out a way to solve it as opposed to talking about it yet again a year later. Mr. Klus replied that he personally thinks for the Park Board to recommend to the City Council that we need to build something and the City is going to have to subsidize it, which means it's going to come out of the residents of the city, would be a very tough sell. Mr. Ward pointed out 5 that on the other hand the city subsidizes a lot of activities such as the Senior Center and Art Center to name a couple. Mr. Klus responded that there are subsidies and he thinks there is a level of what the city can subsidize. Mr. Ward commented that he's not suggesting that it needs to be subsidized, he's suggesting that they need to be open to talking about it. He noted that he thinks there are ways to charge user fees for a dome facility and even gyms that approximate some of the revenue costs. They might not cover all of it but if you don't look at it as a community asset, as a starting point we might not be able to find a good solution. Mr. Ward stated that they are all serving the same people so they need to find a common ground and a solution that works for everyone. He noted that both boys and girls basketball associations have huge needs in their programs. He stated that there are going to be challenges and they need to attack those challenges one at a time. Mr. Ward pointed out that he thinks all of the associations are in agreement that they are willing to spend the time and energy needed to do this. Mr. Nessan asked Mr. Keprios to explain what technically do they mean by a dome to which he replied that with Braemar they could do either a permanent building or an inflatable fabric structure. He explained that the State Fire Code requires that, if you put up an inflatable fabric structure without a fire suppression system, then a road would need to be put in all the way around the bubble for Fire Department vehicles to use for access to the facility. Because of the terrain at that site, that means it would shrink the field and make it a less desirable field. If a permanent building were put in there would be no need for a road because it would have a sprinkler system. Mr. Keprios noted that some would argue that the same site should be used instead for gymnasiums for basketball, volleyball, and other multi-purpose floor events. Mr. Copman explained that the Edina Soccer Club doesn't get out onto the fields until early April and therefore they try and take advantage of what they can because their season starts May I O'h. He noted that there are 700 kids playing on 50 teams for traveling soccer which is up 20 teams from as recent as 3 %2 years ago. Mr. Copman indicated that he has been working closely with Mr. MacHolda in trying to figure out field space. He noted that to have access to any kind of artificial turf would be very helpful for them. Mr. Copman stated that he would be more than happy to open up their books and show what they spend at the Holy Angels dome because they have training going on all winter. He commented that this year Holy Angels had such a demand that they weren't able to have any children's leagues, just adult leagues. Therefore people had to scatter to other facilities. Mr. Copman indicated that what he would like to try to figure out is what the specific financial opportunities are in more detail. He noted that if they have money to build something they also have to think about operating costs and they need to come up with something more financially creative. Mr. Copman stated that they are very interested in putting in some kind of artificial turf that they can use in the winter and longer in the spring as well as lessen their demand in the fall which would help the football program who has a very short season. He explained that they want to make sure that they can maximize the use of the fields, and that they don't overlap as much as they do right now. It's a real issue with overlaps because they just don't have the field space. 701 Mr. Nessan asked if Pamela Park would be considered as a place to build a facility to which Mr. Keprios replied that they have discussed that option. Mr. Ward indicated that he would like to talk outside of the box for a moment and stated that to him there are two big drivers, land in Edina and money to pay for either capital or operating to which he would like to set that issue aside for a minute. He stated that the city owns all of the open space in this town and asked is there an opportunity on some park land to put up a permanent facility that serves all of the programs year round. He noted that we may have to lose a baseball field or a soccer field. Mr. Ward commented that if you want feedback this might be one area for the Park Board to examine. He noted that they would still have to attack the money side of it but that could be looked at as a separate issue. Mr. Klus responded that he thinks the day will come where Edina will maximize the use of its land and as the associations continue to grow as they are today they are going to have to continue to go outside of the city. He stated that there just isn't going to be any other way to do it. Mr. Klus stressed that they still have too many needs that they are not meeting. Mr. Ward asked if maybe it's worthy of the Park Board to examine this in some detail to which Mr. Klus replied he doesn't disagree with that. Mr. Olson asked about the land at Rosland Park and stated that if something is put at Pamela Park the residents are going to be all over the Park Department. Mr. Keprios replied that they are here to hear different ideas. Ms. Presthus commented that she agrees land is always an issue and neighbors are always an issue and that's why they've always looked to the schools where there is land around them. Ms. Presthus indicated that the Basketball Association, Football Association, Baseball Association, etc., have all given a great deal of money to the schools. She noted that she is just trying to make a point that she's not so sure where the high school programs, such as the high school football program, would be without the association's money. Ms. Presthus pointed out that there are going to be more budget cuts in the athletic programs. She stated that she thinks there is room for cooperation considering how much Edina's athletic associations do to promote the high school's athletic programs. Without the associations they may not be able to exist. Mr. Klus asked the associations if they are willing to spend more money with the city in order to provide these new facilities. He noted that may mean the associations would have to divert money that has been given to the Schools programs. He asked if that would even be a feasible option for them in the future. He stated that he realizes some of the associations have committed in the past somewhat to the Schools programs and rightly so which we do need in this community to continue to keep our programs competitive. However, are the associations willing to step up and help raise that money? Mr. Klus explained that he thinks if we recommended that we need a bond issue to build some things it's going to take more than the city to sell it. It's going to take the families of the people that participate in those associations to sell it and if they are not willing to step up he's not so sure it could get sold. Mr. Klus asked is that a feasible thing for the associations to do. Mr. Ward replied that the Basketball Association is able to commit resources including dollars to support new, improved additional facilities in this • community because it's what their constituents want and demand. He noted that he thinks that extends across the board for both boys and girls. Mr. Olson indicated that he doesn't know if Edina Soccer would be able to help. He noted that they have a short season and that the majority of their participants are kindergarten through 3rd grade and then it starts to taper off. He stated that with the majority of them being young players they don't expect them to play indoor soccer during the winter. Mr. Olson commented that it is a good feeder system for the Soccer Club and therefore they would support the Soccer Club in what they wanted to do. However, they already charge $100.00 to play soccer which is a lot of money and if they were to add an additional $20.00 he's not so sure what that would do to their program. Mr. Ward commented that there is a point where you say the cost of being in a sport has out -priced the demand, which that's not necessarily to be determined tonight. Mr. Ward stated that the Basketball Association has probably contributed over $100,000 to the High School Basketball program over the last ten years. He noted that the Basketball Association does have some resources that they can use to support facilities in this community for these programs. He explained that they are going to have to make decisions about how to use those resources but they are willing to support it. It was asked if it would be totally out of the question to have the associations and Park Board as a group meet with the School and see if they might consider something that doesn't require money but rather land. Mr. Klus replied that it is his understanding from the city's perspective that there is nothing more they feel at this point they can do with the school. The school has made it very loud and clear that they are not interested in building additional athletic facilities on their property. Mr. Klus stated that it is his understanding that the athletic director feels they do not have a need for any more facilities. Therefore, if the athletic associations disagree with that, then they need to take that stand to the school and say we don't agree with that. He stated that from a city standpoint he's not sure what more they can do. Mr. Ward indicated that the Edina Schools just passed an 85 million dollar referendum which is being put to use right now. However, his recollection is that the original recommendation was for up to 120 million dollars to which much of that was for additional athletic facilities that the School Board decided to cut. Mr. Ward asked Mr. Johnson isn't that a little inconsistent to say that there is no need for additional athletic facilities when in fact the board's original proposal was to have more facilities. Mr. Johnson explained that there certainly was a wish list of what would be the best case scenario. However, they did studies and had a consulting group come in and say what amount the citizens would be willing to support and it ended up being 85 million. Mr. Johnson pointed out that the whole referendum was for school curriculum and everything above the 85 million was basically gravy and was cut. Mr. Ward asked so are we talking about a community need as opposed to a school need. Mr. Johnson replied that is when the athletic director stated that they have everything they need. He meant that they have everything they need for their curriculum base and for the schools' teams. Mr. Klus commented that right now the school is not willing to work with the community to help them utilize the school because they don't see it as a curriculum need for the schools. However, they do have the land, and they are just not interested in pursuing something outside of the curriculum. Mr. Johnson explained that when they sold this referendum to the public it was based on curriculum and for them to go back and say they are going to add a few gyms and a dome the public would go nuts about deception and saying that we were not telling the truth. Mr. Johnson indicated that what they have learned the last couple of months is that the public wants a say in this matter. Mr. Johnson indicated that he has talked with Tim Walsh, School Board Chairman, that when this is all said and done the two of them would be more than happy to support a city referendum adding facilities onto school property. However, at this time he can't speak for the rest of the School Board. Mr. Keprios commented that based on what they learned from the 2001 referendum the community doesn't buy the relationship of the city doing a referendum to make improvements on school property because they have different boundaries. The recommendation that has been made by the Facilities Study Committee is accurate in saying "The City of Edina should not enter into any future referendum that proposes to build gymnasiums on school property". Mr. Keprios stressed that the city offered the referendum the last time, not the school, and it wasn't a joint referendum. Ms. Presthus noted that the recommendation virtually cuts that out of ever building on school property. Mr. Keprios replied it says the City of Edina will not offer it, it doesn't say the School can't offer a referendum. He noted that it's not the City's job to tell the School Board what to do. Mr. Klus commented that is why they are limited as a Park Board on what they can do with school property. If the associations feel that the best place to develop facilities is at the schools then it's the associations that need to talk to the School District. Mr. Ward responded that the Basketball Association thinks that the best spot for something to get done in the near future as opposed to five or ten years down the road is somewhere on city property. Ms. Sitek stated that whoever is using it will then have to cover the operating costs to which Mr. Johnson added that's the kicker. Mr. Olson asked how much is that because maybe the associations could get together. However, the question then would be how to split that up. Ms. Hulbert asked if the GM Warehouse site is a building that can structurally be used and we just convert it. Mr. Klus replied that's correct but they first need to find out if it's even available for sale to the city and as of right now they are not sure where it's at. He noted that is something they can direct the staff to look into for the Park Board as one of our options and see what kind of feedback we get. Ms. Presthus pointed out that they have to keep in mind that piece of property is pretty prime property with a huge tax base so it's not exactly like let's just make a field there and it's not going to cost the city anything. Mr. Damman noted that he is still pretty convinced that the facilities that they are talking about should be on school property. He indicated that he realizes the associations want something right now but he's not so sure that in the long-term it would be good. He stated that he would like to look at the whole thing. 0 Mr. Finsness commented that he thinks the feedback has been great. Ms. Sitek noted that she would like to look into some of the points that were brought up and put it all together. Mr. Sorem asked when they are talking about putting up a permanent building at Braemar does that mean they would lose that as a field if it were converted to which it was noted yes. Mr. Olson replied that the Edina Soccer Club loves that field to which Mr. Copman responded that they would be happy to give up a field to have a permanent structure if they had an indoor facility that they could use. He noted that it would make up your 52 weeks a year as opposed to seasonal play. Ms. Presthus pointed out that the but area still needs to be considered because that area is in the referendum. Mr. Johnson explained that old auditorium is going to be made into a multi-purpose room and whether that's a complete substitute for the but he doesn't know. Mr. Ettinger commented that Steve Dove came to their EFA meeting last month and said that they would like to build off the tennis courts over the Concord field and put the but storage underneath. Mr. Johnson replied that's just storage. Ms. Presthus stated that the point there is that it's not just storage. The Kids Club and after school activities use that as a gym and they have no where to go if those huts are eliminated. She noted that there's a push that needs more community support because right now in the referendum they are expected to be torn down which means Kids Club and some of those other activities are going to be pushed back into the schools and there is no space for them. She indicated that in the referendum that space is going to be used as an open space where you can have a picnic before a game. Ms. Presthus stated that they need community support to say either keep the huts or put some type of a gym surface in there. Mr. Johnson indicated that he knows football uses Winter Park and asked if there is an option to use more of it. Mr. Ettinger replied that because of the regime with Coach Tice, an Edina resident, he has opened up Winter Park to football, girls soccer and baseball. Ms. Presthus commented that the High School football team uses it as well as High School soccer. She added that the school needs to be very careful if they think the curriculum needs are met. Mr. Johnson stated that obviously the best place to put the dome is at Kuhlman, however, we then run into problems with the surrounding residents who don't want it located there. Mr. Johnson pointed out that they are going to add two fields where McCarthy is so they will gain the field they are losing with the parking lot between South View and the Community Center. He stated that they are going to be losing some fields; however, they are going to be gaining a synthetic turf field at the high school which they will be able to use more and more of. Also, they are going to have synthetic turf at Kuhlman which they will able to use more often. Mr. Johnson stated that as far as gym space the only real logical place would be at Valley View because in talking with Scot Housh it sounds like they want an area where they could put three to four gyms so that they can run tournaments and use it more effectively. Mr. Johnson again stated that he would be more than happy to look at this after everything with the referendum is done. He noted that he did suggest doing this now while they are building it, however, he was shot down 10 • because of the deception to the public even if they say the City is building it. Mr. Ettinger commented that he feels that's a marketing issue to which Mr. Johnson agreed. Mr. Ettinger pointed out that one member of the school has approached two members of the Football Association looking for a significant donation to get turf for McCarthy upper fields and to get it done now. He stated that he thinks that's a little out of line to which Mr. Klus added that it doesn't meet the curriculum issue. Mr. MacHolda informed the Park Board that Mr. Ettinger, Mr. Nessan and himself met with Steve Dove to look at the plans for the Community Center campus. He stated that he thought Mr. Dove said that they added a field to McCarthy but in his view they don't. He indicated that they lose a back -stop and an infield you just re -stripe the green space that is there but you don't gain green space. Mr. MacHolda stated that by just moving the baseball field below, you are not gaining green space but simply stripping it differently. Mr. Johnson noted that you're gaining probably % a field. Mr. MacHolda stated that they didn't see it as a gain, because he thinks losing the green space in between the two buildings is a significant loss of green space. The original concept was that converting Kuhlman Stadium to artificial turf would result in gaining additional field use time; however, Mr. MacHolda has heard that band will be marching on that and so it really won't be a gain. Mr. Klus summarized what he is hearing from the associations who are here tonight. The Associations would like the Park Board to go back and look at all city -owned property for facility use and come up with a plan that they would feel comfortable recommending to the City for facility use on some park property that they currently have. The facility may be a bubble or a permanent structure, but it's one that can be used by multiple associations. In addition the Associations would like some costs analysis as to what it would cost to build something as well as what it would cost to operate it. Once the Park Board has that knowledge they would bring it to the Associations to receive their feedback at that time. Mr. Klus noted that he thinks as a Park Board they can accomplish that within the next three to four months. However, after this meeting he will need to check with Mr. Keprios and Mr. Hughes to make sure that they can provide what they need to do the property analysis and come back and say here's what we think we can do now on city property. Mr. Klus stated that as a board he would like to entertain a motion to that effect from one of the Park Board members so they can at least formally put that into their minutes and begin working on that. He stated that they will talk about how they will work on that later in the meeting. Linda Presthus MOVED. Andy Finsness SECONDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. IV. UPDATES A. Park Visits and Park Presentations — Mr. Klus informed Mr. Johnson that he will be on the June Park Board agenda to give his park assignments presentation. 11 B. Wine License — Braemar Golf Course — Mr. Keprios indicated that the Park Board's • recommendation did go on to City Council and that they had their First Reading because it requires amendments to two ordinances; one for consumption and one to allow Braemar Golf Course to purchase a wine license. He noted that they approved it but not without discussion. He noted that they had the question of why is this coming forward, are we going to actually sell wine on the course itself and if so are we going to sell wine coolers. Mr. Keprios commented that after the discussion they did pass the First Reading it so it goes onto its Second Reading which will be one week from tonight. C. Student Park Board Member - Mr. Klus informed the Park Board that Allyson Grande will be graduating in June and indicated that the Mayor will need to appoint a new School Park Board member. He noted that so far they do have at least one person who has applied for the position. D. Upcoming Park Board Meetings - Mr. Klus reminded the Park Board that next month's Park Board meeting will be held at the South Metro Training Facility and in July there will be no meeting because of the Braemar Inspection Tour. In August they will resume their meetings at Edina City Hall. V. REVISIT FEEDBACK FROM ATHLETIC ASSOCIATIONS Mr. Klus commented that he appreciates the motion and thinks it's something they can continue to look at as a Park Board. He noted that he thinks they need to move it along quickly. Mr. Klus noted that he thinks what Mr. Keprios and staff need to do is to make some recommendations to the Park Board between this meeting and next months meeting on some of your thoughts and what you think we should be looking at. He stated that he would like to have that in an e-mail before their next meeting rather than wait until the next meeting. He noted that he would also like feedback on what is happening with the GM building. Ms. Sitek stated that more importantly she thinks they need to come up with numbers regarding operating costs because she's not so sure they are going to want to pay it. Mr. Klus replied that they need to look at some locations so they know what it's going to cost them. He commented that they have an idea what Braemar is going to cost them right now if it was a permanent structure. Mr. Klus asked Mr. Keprios if he could give the Park Board a staff report on what he thinks might be some of their best options as well as get some rough costs. He noted that he would like to have that e-mailed to the Park Board in order to get some feedback from the Park Board before next months meeting. That way they can start the meeting with what some thoughts are. Mr. Johnson asked if the donor who is coming forward strictly wants a dome. Mr. Keprios replied that it's coming from a gentleman who has a strong interest in artificial turf, an indoor field, specifically for his sport of choice which is lacrosse. He has stated 12 that he is willing to come up 1.5 million dollars. Mr. Johnson asked so it is only for that specific purpose to which Mr. Keprios replied correct, he is not interested in gyms. Mr. Sorem asked if this donor was pretty much unsolicited to which it was noted yes. He noted that maybe the associations could work together on some sort of fundraising effort. Mr. Sorem commented that he's new to the Park Board and didn't realize the need that there is for all of this and is not so sure that the majority of the residents in Edina are aware of the serious need that is there. He stated that there are a lot of people in this community with a lot of money that might donate large amounts of money that could maybe cover some of the significant costs. Mr. Klus indicated that he thinks this is the first time they've heard from the associations more of a willingness to step forward and work with this. Mr. Finsness noted that he heard at least three of them say they would give at least $10,000 a year is what he added up towards the school to which he doesn't know how much of that they can divert. Also, for soccer to say they would be happy to give up one of the fields to have an indoor facility they are being generous in their own minds. Mr. Keprios replied it's a move in the right direction. Mr. Sorem stated that he's not so sure they can divert the money but just look at how much money they would save by not going to Holy Angels and Burnsville. Mr. Damman indicated that if the Athletic Associations are giving this kind of money to the schools couldn't we see if they could talk to the schools and put pressure on them so they won't lose that kind of money. He noted that it seems to him that we are throwing the Facilities Study Committee's recommendations right out the door. Mr. Klus commented that is not what he is hearing from the associations. He noted that what he is hearing them tell the Park Board tonight is if the school is out then we have to go look for something else. He didn't hear them say well let's go talk to the school as he was hoping he would hear them say tonight. Their thinking is if the school is not an option, then we have to move on to other opportunities. Mr. Klus commented that he thinks the Blue Ribbon Task Force in 2001, the Facilities Needs Committee and the School Board have all identified needs and made decisions on what they felt was important at the time. Unfortunately, however, those needs have not changed. Mr. Klus stated that he doesn't think we've done a good job in this community of marketing those needs and added that he doesn't feel the school has ever done a very good job of marketing what their needs are. He stated that he believes marketing is one of the reasons some of this stuff has failed because we don't educate enough. Ms. Hulbert asked if it would be possible to work up two models to present how this would work if it were done on school property as well as what a budget would look like in that case. She asked if there is an ideal piece of school property to use. Mr. Johnson responded that he thinks the only place it would really work would be at the middle schools or high school for gymnasiums. He noted that as far as green space he's not sure how many more fields they can put in. He commented that Mr. Ratelle from the Baseball Association had talked earlier about fixing up the baseball field by the tennis courts at 13 Valley View. Mr. MacHolda pointed out that he continually hears from residents that the quantity of practice and game space is not there and noted that he thinks they need to look at just the season as being the number one item that they need to tackle. Mr. MacHolda stated that someone is going to have to either eliminate a portion of their program or somebody is going to have to decide to go during the day because they don't have enough evening space to accommodate everyone. Paul Ferry, Edina LaCrosse Association, apologized for being late and asked for a copy of the report that was given out. He indicated that it would be great if they could get a facility for the kids. He stated that currently there are 300 to 400 kids play lacrosse and the numbers keep growing. He noted that it would really nice to have a dome and thanked the Park Board for considering building a facility. Mr. Johnson suggested to the Park Board that perhaps they can get all of the athletic association presidents to send some e-mails to Steve Dove and Ken Dragseth about possibly pulling some of their funding and say if something is not going to happen they may have to divert their funds elsewhere in order to build their own private facilities. Mr. Klus replied that's a good suggestion and they should discuss that at next month's meeting. Mr. Johnson stressed that he doesn't want to get into a big contest where they butt heads. Ms. Presthus added that it's nice that they haven't had to do that and that they've been able to work very cooperatively. Mr. Klus indicated that one of the things he heard earlier was that maybe the schools • shouldn't be using our parks as much and perhaps the associations should be using them more instead. Especially if the schools are getting them for free and other people need somewhere to play. Mr. Johnson responded that plays right into the curriculum thing if you say the High School Baseball team can't use Braemar, the school now has to find a field of their own and that changes the playing field a little bit. Mr. Klus commented that he thinks in some ways it's going to come down to some of those issues. Mr. Johnson asked the Park Board is there something from the Park Board that he could take back saying here is specifically what is being asked of the schools in terms gymnasiums and fields, etc. Mr. Klus replied that he thinks that has already been given to the school. Mr. Keprios explained that the city and school worked very closely together on the referendum and the voters said no. Mr. Keprios indicated that he fully agrees with what Mr. Johnson said earlier in that the best place for a bubble is at Kuhlman Stadium. Mr. Keprios pointed out that every community faces opposition when they propose to build a bubble; however their school boards ultimately vote yes because they feel it's the right thing to do for their community. Ms. Presthus informed Mr. Johnson that two different plans were drawn up for both Valley View and the Community Center area from the last referendum and she doesn't think those things have changed. Mr. Johnson commented that there is money in this referendum for the lower field at the high school to get improved. He stated that wouldn't be a bad spot to put a dome except it has the 20 year flood and getting down there in the winter time might get a little tricky. However, that would be a spot that 14 would be away from the public. Mr. Keprios stated that the thing that has changed with this school referendum is now there are other spaces being consumed for other uses such as more performing arts and parking lots. He indicated that he thinks we need to hear from the associations as to what they want. He noted that we need to be aware of the remaining options now with the way the school is developing things. Mr. Klus stated that right now he thinks the directive is to find a site for either a dome or a permanent structure on a multi -use building that they can preferably be put in a park setting or city land. He indicated that now he thinks they need to move on the motion that was made earlier and at the June Park Board meeting they should at least be somewhat down the road on thoughts of what will work in this community. Mr. Klus asked the Park Board to give them something before the next meeting so everyone can ponder it and decide where to go. VI. ADJOURNMENT Linda Presthus MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:00 P.M. Karla Sitek SECONDED THE MOTION. MEETING ADJOURNED. 15 • Wayne A. Hergott 5629 Interlachen Circle Edina, MN 55436 952 927-8842 hergiewna,aol.com May 17, 2004 Vince Cockriel Superintendent of Park Services City of Edina RE: Spraying of Highland Lake 5146 Eden Ave. Edina, MN 55436 Dear Vince, Thank you for meeting on May 5th with some of us living on Highland Lake regarding our concern about the condition of the lake, particularly the Duck Weed on the lake. As the photos show, the lake was a carpet of green Duck Weed from about mid-June until frost last year. Not only was the lake unsightly but it was also occasionally odorous and the smell drove us off our deck and into the house. No one will swim in the lake and few even canoe on it in its deteriorated condition. Because of the unsightly and odorous condition of the lake, eight homeowners on the lake have agreed to share equally in the cost of spraying to eliminate Duck Weed, if the city will not bear the cost of spraying its lake. The agreement is based on your estimate that two sprayings costing about $500 each will be necessary each season and the city will administer the sprayings. If the cost is going to be greater than the $1,000 estimated, I feel the need to consult with the eight homeowners again before spraying is done. It is my understanding that about 40 lakes and ponds within the city are sprayed and the chemicals used, which would also be used on Highland Lake, have EPA approval. It is also my understanding that upon receipt of this letter you will arrange for our appearance before the Edina Park Board so we may request the Board's support in our effort to obtain permission from the DNR to spray. There are some dates when I will be out of town but will try to arrange to have some of our group attend if I cannot. Very truly yours, A� Wayne Hergott cc: See attached list Cc of Ltr of May 17, 2004 to Vince Cockriel, Edina Park Superintendent, from Wayne Hergott: Jay & Tara Jensen, 5617 Interlachen Circle Bruce & Nancy Gethin, 5621 Interlachen Circle Vizma Podniek, 5625 Interlachen Circle Marge & Wayne Hergott, 5629 Interlachen Circle Jon & Mary Jo Barnett, 5633 Interlachen Circle Thom & Lynne Winninger, 5637 Interlachen Circle Jason & Linda Jones, 5109 Mirror Lakes Drive Frona & Rick Ites, 5125 Mirror Lakes Drive May 27, 2004 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Mr. John Keprios, Director Edina Park and Recreation City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina Minnesota 55424-1330 Dear Mr. Keprios: 9925 Valley View Rd Eden Prairie MN 55344 (952)826-6756 We recently received a request for information about duckweed (Lemna spp.) removal on Highland Park Pond (DOW 27-066800). This letter is to inform you of the Minnesota rules regarding mechanical and chemical removal of duckweed on Minnesota protected waters, such as Highland Park Pond. No DNR permit is needed to skim duckweed off the surface of the pond. However, • Highland Park Pond is a city storm water treatment pond, so it would be prudent to check with any interested parties with the city of Edina on whether permission from the city is necessary for duckweed removal. Also, please be aware that if aquatic vegetation is removed from the pond using a skimming machine or seine, pursuant to Minnesota Rule 6280.0250, Subpart 1C(3) aquatic macrophytes that have been cut or pulled must immediately and permanently be removed from the water. We recommend taking the vegetation offsite to a compost site. Mechanical removal of other types of vegetation, such as water lilies does require a "Permit to Destroy Aquatic Vegetation" from the Department of Natural Resources. A permit application and directions for applying are available on the DNR website (www.dnr.state.mn.us) in the Ecological Services section. In addition, any chemical removal of duckweed or other vegetation requires a permit. There are a number of rules to be aware of when applying for a permit. The following are a summary of some of the rules to be aware of that relate to Highland Park Pond. An APM permit will not be issued to improve the appearance of undeveloped shoreline or for esthetic purposes alone on developed shoreline (MR 6280.0250, Subp. 4). Permits are issued when vegetation impedes recreation and recreational access. For Highland Park Pond, a permit will not be granted if the only justification given on the application is to improve the appearance of the pond. An inspector will visit the site and determine if duckweed is impeding recreation on the pond. Mr. John Keprios May 27, 2004 Page 2 On storm water retention ponds, treatment may occur on up to five acres or one half the surface area of the pond, whichever is less (MR 6280.0350, Subp. 4A[3]). Highland Park Pond is considered a storm water retention pond, and is 10 acres, therefore up to 5 acres could be permitted. The commissioner or his representative may reduce the amount of littoral area that the applicant proposes to control (MR 6280.0350, Subp. 413). Any application for treatment must include the names, addresses, location on lake, and signatures of all property owners whose shorelines will be treated. Signatures must be obtained every year or when there is a change of property ownership (MR 6280.0350, Subp. 413). Any treatment within 150' of an individual's shoreline requires a signature. Offshore treatment only requires one signature. No Minnesota DNR approved herbicides provide complete control of duckweed. However labels for Reward, Hydrothol 191, Aquacide, and Aquakleen report partial control of duckweed. If you have any further questions, please contact Jacquelyn Bacigalupi, Natural Resources Specialist at 952-826-6770 or Aquatic Plant Management staff at 651-772- 7957 or 651-772-7956. Sincerely, Daryl Ellis ry Area Fisheries Supervisor c Dirk Peterson Neil Vanderbosch Cite of Wind RESOLUTION WHEREAS, smoking is a major risk factor for premature death; and WHEREAS, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that there are over 440,000 premature deaths each year in the United States due to tobacco; and WHEREAS, the best way to prevent this loss of life is by not using tobacco; and WHEREAS, adults need to set a good example for our youth; and WHEREAS, the Edina Community Health Committee considered this matter at its May 18, 2004 meeting and voted in favor of this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina Community Health Committee adopt a resolution supporting a ban on tobacco use in City of Edina parks during youth athletic events; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be forwarded to the Edina Park Board for its consideration and deliberation at its regular meeting on June 8, 2004. Idelle Longman, Chair Edina Community Health Committee City Hall (952) 927-8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (952) 826-0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424-1394 TDD (952) 826-0379 Darlene Wallin From: GlorPaulPad@webtv.net ient: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:10 AM To: Darlene Wallin Subject: Brief Comments on Smoking in Parks and Beer/Wine Sales at Braemar. Per our conversation Monday I will be going to Mayo for tests so I would appreciate your getting this info, to the City Council for their consideration tonight. I have enjoyed my living in Edina for the past 25 years and I attribute alot of this was actions of the City Council. The ban on Smoking in Parks where all kids gather is a good idea . The Parks are mainly for kids and we need to protect them. Eight days ago I took my two grandsons Rosland Park Playground. There were 20 to 25 kids their Mothers ( many were pregnant) or their Grandparents. I found a open bench and sat down only to find a strong smell of Cigarette Smell coming from two benches away ( 15 ft ) were two woman who were chain smoking for the entire 20 minutes I was there. There vas no wind , so I wondered what the effects were on the 10 to 15 two and three year old kids playing just in front of them. (2 and 3 ) to the with A sign in the areas of kid concentrations stating " Smoking not allowed in this Area - Enforceable with a $100 fine" is a great idea. It has been my experience the word "Suggested" is a waste of time and money. A comment about selling beer and wine in Braemar. Here again Braemar was built for kids, We spend $80 Billion a year for wine and alcoholic drinks, we do not need another place to drink and imply to our kids it's OK. About half of the 43,000 vehicle deaths are alcohol related and a part of the $202 Billion costs related to drinking. Paul N. Green 6945 Southdale Road 1 -----Original Message ----- From: Grabiel, Floyd [mailto:fgrabiel@tsi.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 11:17 AM To: gklus@trinityms.com Subject: Park Board Meeting, 6/8 George: As you know, I will not be able to attend the Meeting on the 8th due to a business commitment. I understand that one topic of discussion will be a smoking policy for the parks. Please communicate my thoughts on that issue. I am not a smoker. I think it would be great if the State would impose a smoking ban in bars and restaurants. Having said that, I am strongly opposed to any kind of law or regulation to prohibit smoking in any outdoor areas of the Edina Parks (Indoor areas are a different subject). In the first place, such a law would be mostly unenforceable. Do we really expect the Edina Police to spend time and effort rounding up miscreants who have the audacity to smoke a cigarette, pipe or cigar while walking the dog? Given the prevalence of office and commercial structures around Centennial Lakes, is it realistic at all to assume that such a law would be followed? Adopting an unenforceable law weakens respect for the law in general. ("If they're not going to or can't enforce this ordinance, why should I pay attention to another one?") Secondly, smoking is not illegal or immoral. There is some evidence that second hand smoke does have a negative health effect, and therefore actions to limit or prohibit smoking indoors are appropriate. But can anyone with a straight face make an argument that smoking outdoors is a problem? Of course not. If such an argument could be made, then smoking might be prohibitable everywhere. Even then, however, one would have to consider the negative consequences of an outright prohibition of smoking - remember what happened when they tried that with alcohol. Finally, I see this as an effort by a few to impose their view of what's best for the world on everyone, regardless of circumstance. As I mentioned, I am not a smoker. People do not smoke in my house, nor in my car. What you do with your house and your car is your business. If one of the associations wants to limit smoking at their events, then the association can do so. But it's not right for the softball association to tell the football association how to run their functions. Each association can set its own rules, and can take the responsibility for enforcing them for their functions. But they cannot extend their rules to the general public who have every right to use the parks. Regards, Floyd Grabiel City of Edina 2001 Referendum Braemar Dome (370'x 180') Item Qty Cost Total Remove trees and underbrush 1 L. S. $ 6,000 $ 6,000 $ 6,000 Strip Vegetation and Haul Off 1 L. S. $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Export Soils 3000 C. Y. $ 6 $ 24,000 Rough Grading 1 L. S. $ 24,000 $ 24,000 Silt Fence 800 L.F. $ 3 $ 2,400 $ 52,400 Primary Site Access 1 L. S. $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Fire Lane 800'X 20• 1800 S. Y, $ » $ 30,600 $ 30,600 Dome Structure incl. constructio 370 x 180 1 L.S. $ 888,000 $ 888,000 Utilities 1 L. S. $ V,000 $ 30,000 $ 918,000 Retaining Wall 2800 S.F. $ 18 $ 50,400 $ 50,400 Resilient Turf w/ infrastructure 370 x 180 66800 S.F. $ 6.00 $ 599,400 $ 599,400 Storm Sewer Subtotal 15% General Conditions 10% Contigency 10% Fees & Testing Topo Survey and Soil Borings 1 L. S. $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Anderson -Johnson Associates, Inc., 2/5/01 Page 28 of 32 $1,731,800 12.0% $ 207,816 $1,939,616 10.0%_$ 193,962 $ 2,133,578 10.0%-$ 213,358 $2,346,935 $ 3,500 $ 2,350,435 Total $2,351,000 Memo T0: Edina Park Board From: Kathy Iverson Date: June 3, 2004 I have attached some additional information that I thought may be useful to the discussion on tobacco free parks at the meeting scheduled for June 8. Mission, Vision, Goals - Natimal Recreaticm and Park association National Recreation and Park Association v� • VI. a Guide ■ NRPA Store R Career Center 613f04 3:47 PM SITE MAP I CONTACT US Membership Has Its Advantages Copyright 2004, National Recreation and Park Association. All Rights Reserved. PrivaPolicy 22377 Belmont Ridge Road, Ashburn, VA 20148-4150, Phone 703.858.0784 Fax 703.858.0794 E-mail info@nrpa.org http://www.utpa.org/content/default.aspx'?dmument[d=4�)0 Page I of 1 Home Page > About NRPA > Mission, Vision, Goals Home Mission, Vision, Goals About NRPA Mission, Vision, Goals The Mission of the National Recreation and Park Association is "To Leadership advance parks, recreation and environmental conservation efforts that enhance the quality of life for all people." Branches and Sections NRPA's Values - We believe that parks and recreation: NRPA Regions National and State • Enhances the human potential by providing facilities, services and Affiliates programs that meet the emotional, social and physical needs of communities. Awards Proqrams . Articulates environmental values through ecologically responsible Annual Fund management and environmental education programs. . Promotes individual and community wellness that enhances the quality Staff Directory of life for all citizens. Membership • Utilizes holistic approaches to promote cultural understanding, economic development, family public health and safety, by working in Advocacv coalitions and partnerships with allied organizations. . Facilitates and promotes the development of grassroots, self-help News initiatives in communities across the country. Traininq & Development The Goals of the National Recreation and Park Association are: Publications & Research • To promote public awareness and support for recreation, park and Proqrams & Partnerships leisure services as they relate to the constructive use of leisure and Marketinq opportunities thereby to the social stability of a community and the physical and mental health of individuals. NRPA strives to promote public Resources awareness of the environmental and natural resource management aspects of recreation and leisure services. C, :t Us . To facilitate the development, maintenance, expansion and improvement of socially and environmentally relevant public policy that supports recreation, parks and leisure programs and services. . To enhance the development of parks, recreation and tourism make a professionals and to provide services that contribute to the donation � development of NRPA members. . To promote the development and dissemination of the body of -,.----------- - ---•. - knowledge in order to improve the delivery of service, increase understanding of leisure behavior and expand the body of knowledge relative to parks and recreation programs and services. NRPA's Form 990 Available NRPA's Federal ID # 13-5563001 ::Read Vision 2010: A Strategic Plan for the Future:: ::Read NRPA's Strateov for Diversity:: NRPA Professional Code of Ethics Vision 2010::A Strategic Plan for the Future 613f04 3:47 PM SITE MAP I CONTACT US Membership Has Its Advantages Copyright 2004, National Recreation and Park Association. All Rights Reserved. PrivaPolicy 22377 Belmont Ridge Road, Ashburn, VA 20148-4150, Phone 703.858.0784 Fax 703.858.0794 E-mail info@nrpa.org http://www.utpa.org/content/default.aspx'?dmument[d=4�)0 Page I of 1 Tobacco -Free Youth Recreation Policy Update June 2, 2004 New tobacco -free park policies: International Falls, Ramsey, and Crookston; total Minnesota policies hits 50 International Falls adopts city ordinance prohibiting tobacco use on all city property, including parks Cities of Ramsey and Crookston also adopt tobacco -free park policies International Falls: On Monday, May 24, the International Falls City Council adopted a tobacco -free ordinance that covers all city property, grounds, and equipment, including all park and recreational property. The ordinance's only exceptions are city streets and sidewalks. With the adoption of this ordinance, not only does International Falls become the northern -most city to adopt regulations for tobacco use in park areas, but, because they have adopted an ordinance, they become the Minnesota city with the strongest regulations! The International Falls Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD) group worked with both the Falls Recreation Commission and the City Council to provide information and rationale for enacting a strong policy. TFYR applauds the SADD group for their work in getting an excellent ordinance adopted! Ramsey: On Tuesday, May 25, the Ramsey City Council adopted a tobacco -free policy for their park property. The City of Ramsey, a community of 18,000 located in the northwestern suburbs, joins Coon Rapids as the second city in Anoka County to adopt a tobacco -free policy for its park property. The Andover -Anoka -Ramsey Youth First group and the Ramsey Youth Athletic Association brought the tobacco -free policy request forward. Kudos to these community groups for taking positive action! Crookston: On Tuesday, May 25, the Crookston City Council took a first step towards tobacco -free parks by enacting a tobacco -free policy during youth events at their city athletic complexes. Crookston becomes the first city in all of northwestern Minnesota to adopt a tobacco -free policy for park and recreational areas. Congratuations to the City of Crookston and the Polk County Public Health staff for assisting them! As in many other communities, International Falls, Ramsey, and Crookston will enforce their policies via tobacco -free signs provided by Tobacco -Free Youth Recreation. They will also work with community groups and local tobacco control staff to develop a public awareness plan about the policy. NEW BRIGHTON t Summer 2004 INSIDE THIS ISSUE Staff & Commission .....................1 Special Announcements ............2 Family Service Center.................3 Eagles Nest...................................5 Facility Rentals .............................7 Special Events ..............................9 Summer Playgrounds................11 Youth Activities..............................13 Youth Sports..................................17 Youth Sports Camps......................22 Teen Activities ............................23 Adult Sports................................25 Fitness..........................................27 Senior Activities ........................29 Aquatics.......................................33 Golf................................................39 Forestry ........................................41 Registration.................................42 Parks & Facilities ......................44 ParkMap.....................................46 City Events..................Back Cover Registration by mail, fax and New ONLINE begins Tuesday: April 6. Registration by phone and in-person begins Tuesday, April 13 Check it Out! Parks & Rec registration and facility viewing is now online! See page 42. t�k Lzmz.f its arQ R.r)jIk3S_."; 651-638-2130 for General Information - FAX: 651-638-2135 0 www.newbrightommn.gov Special Mp ip'�lii4'S"h,�81llY,d�'ftP :k+M�no-. i;, •ptgw�,,: .. Announcements The Tobacco -Free Youth Recreation Initiative N Tobacco Use is l(1-1.1) On This Park Property Thank You. r Y� Why are Tobacco -Free Policies for Outdoor Recreation Facilities so -tportant? ■ City-wide policies support groups that have existing policies when they are using city recreation facilities. ■ Since most school districts prohibit tobacco use in all their facilities, city-wide policies create consistency for all youth recreational facilities in the community. ■ Cigarette butts cause litter, increase maintenance expenses, and pose the risk of ingestion by toddlers using recreation facilities. ■ Creating tobacco -free environ- ments protects the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Tobacco -Free Youth Recreation (TFYR) is Minnesota's statewide recreation -based tobacco prevention program that assists recreational groups in modeling and promoting healthy tobacco -free lifestyles for young people who are involved in their programs. TFYR offers assistance in tobacco -free policy development & implementation and also develops materials that promote the tobacco -free sports message throughout Minnesota. Tobacco -Free Outdoor Recreation Facilities Make Sense ■ Secondhand smoke harms everyone and kills thou- sands every year. Exposure to secondhand smoke is the third leading cause of preventable death in the United States, killing approximately 53,000 people every year. ■ Secondhand smoke is harmful in outdoor settings. According to Repace Associates, secondhand smoke levels in outdoor public places can reach levels as high as those found in indoor facilities where smok- ing is permitted. ■ Tobacco -free policies help change community norms. Tobacco -free policies establish the community norm that tobacco use is not an acceptable behavior for young people or adults within the entire community. ■ Most Minnesota parents support tobacco -free policies for outdoor playgrounds. A 1998 survey showed that 68% of Minnesota parents support smoking bans in outdoor playgrounds and 80% support a ban in all public places where children are present. Why are Tobacco -Free Policies Effective? We're Building a Better City Hall! Pardon the mess while we remod- el City Hall. From now until fall 2004, visitors to City Hall will be re-routed to accommodate con- struction activities. The License Bureau will be located on the lower level during this time, with easy access parking in the rear of the building. Administration and Finance offices also will occupy the lower level temporarily while their upstairs space is under repair. Once the south part of City Hall is done, construction will shift to the north half. Engi- neering, Community Develop- ment, and Permits will be relocat- ed for awhile downstairs. A drop box for your utility bills is still conveniently located in the park- ing lot at the rear of City Hall if you'd just like to drive through. Thanks for your patience during this process! ■ Policies reinforce to youth the message that tobacco use is unhealthy and unnecessary behavior. ■ Policies ensure that participants and spectators are not exposed to secondhand smoke. ■ Policies create an environment where leaders can model and promote healthy lifestyle choices. Minnesota Cities with Tobacco -Free Outdoor Recreational Facilities ■ Aitkin ■ Coon Rapids ■ Maple Grove ■ Savage ■ Aurora ■ Duluth ■ Mountain Iron ■ Spicer ■ Austin ■ Eagan ■ New Brighton ■ St. Cloud ■ Baxter ■ Eden Prairie ■ Nwd Yng America ■ St. Paul ■ Biwabik ■ Eveleth ■ Owatonna ■ Virginia ■ Bloomington ■ Golden Valley ■ Plymouth ■ Willmar ■ Brainerd ■ Grand Rapids ■ Richfield ■ Zimmerman ■ Breckenridge ■ Hibbing ■ Rochester ■ Buhl ■ Hoyt Lakes ■ Roseville ■ Cohasset ■ Mahtomedi ■ Sartell New Brighton Parks & Recreation - 651-638-2130 ph - 651-638-2135 fax - www.newbrightommn.gov - Page 2 From: Greg Hanks Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 4:43 PM 01 To: 'Menze002@TC.UMN.edu' Subject: Kathy, Hope this is helpful and sort of what you were seeking. This is what is in our Standard Operating Manual and the code of conduct we give staff and new members. Greg Policy: The YMCA has designated its offices, facilities, grounds and vehicles smoke free because of its: * Goal "to improve the physical, mental, and spiritual wellbeing of persons." Dedication to providing a healthy and comfortable environment for its team members, program participants and volunteers. Guidelines: Tobacco products are prohibited in the offices, facilities, grounds and vehicles of the YMCA. In addition team members may not smoke while performing their job responsibilities off YMCA property. Procedures: Team members who violate this policy are subject to warnings and other disciplinary action.