Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-01-22 Park Board PacketEDINA PARK BOARD January 22, 1985 6:30 p.m. Edina City Hall SPECIAL PARK BOARD MEETING AGENDA I. Wooddale/Utley Park Projects TO: FROM: DATE:. SUBJECT: Ken Rosland, City Manager Bob Kojetin, Director, Park and Recreation Department October 24, 1983 Edina Park and Recreation Staff's Position on Wooddale School Park At the October 20, 1983 Park and Recreation Staff meeting attended by Bob Kojetin, Rick Jacobson, John Keprios, John Valliere, Carole Kulak, Mary Huiras, Pat Greer, Marion Ward, Larry Thayer, Mitch Asplund, Susan Weigle, and Madelyn Krinke, three areas of concern were discussed: 1) If we had the building, how would we program it. 2) If we did not have the school building how would we use the land. 3) Pros and Cons of the facilities 1) Programming If We Had The Building: Expanded room for the Art Center - -Studio Art Rooms could be rented out -Use classrooms for larger Art classes -Use larger rooms for workships - Art -Use larger rooms for Watercolor Club & others having guest speakers -Art Camp -Performing Arts activities -Use large rooms for dance instruction -Use stage for performing Arts - theater -Use large rooms to show old movies (like they do at Walker Art Center) -home for the Sousa'Band and their equipment Seven Day A Week Usage of Gymnasium - Use of gym for basketball, volleyball, Floor hockey If possible to knock out walls and make Use for registrations Gymnastics location Room Usage - Park & Recreation Video Center - Use for headquarters for tours - Rooms for other community groups - Expansion of Historical Society - Sr. Boutique location - Sr. Citizen North area - Use for Halloween haunted house - Santa House location indoor sports, ie indoor tennis larger area - use for indoor soccer Give each athletic association a meeting & storage room for their equipment t- -2- 1) Surrounding property if school was still in tact would be primarily left the same, except relocation of parking lot and hard surfaced area west of the school would be recommended. 2) How We Would Use the Land if School Building Demolished -Playground activities -Playground equipment -Picnic area -T-ball -Football -Small soccer field -Sr. Citizen passive area -Install overhead walkway across Wooddale Street to connect Utley Park with Wooddale -Ice skating rink -Possible small children's spray pool -Expanded Open Space 3) Pros and Cons of the facilities Cons: -We would run into direct conflicts with the Community Education Programs. -We would take away from the use of the Community Center Facility -Most of the activities which would be recommended would not be accommodated by the present layout of the building. Costly renovations would be required before many of the -rooms would be feasible for the activities being recommended. -If additional programming was done in the building, a program coordinator would have to be present between 7 a.m. and 11 p.m. to take care of scheduling, answering phones, etc. Other staff would also be necessary, i.e. custodians. -Increased parking problems due to added activities. -Additional traffic would be generated by increased activities at the building -General upgrading of the building would be very costly in the long run - projecting into the next 30-50 years, because of the very large size of the building. -Maintenance on such a large and old building is expected to be extremely costly. Pros: -Because of th-e gymnasium and auditorium facility of the school, this would be a very useful facility to have in the vicinity because of the number of multi -purposes which could be programmed by the Park & Recreation Department. -If expansion of rooms by knocking down walls and partitions could be don in • the building so as to create larger spaces, this would also add more Positive programming of many of these activities. In consideration of all of the above, the general concensus of the Park and Recreation statf is that in general, the structure would not be usable as it presently is arranged for most of the programming which would be recommended; the cost of renovating and up- grading the present structure would be extremely high; the building and land would be a liability, because very little revenue would be derived from the types of programs which are being recommended. The staff was concerned about funding to cover the necessary budget expenses if such the building and land were acquired. The present budget of Park -3 - and Recreation could not withstand the burden of the additional tunds which would be required. It would demand the same maintenance staffing which the school presently has and also it would require some additional Park & Rec staft to do in-house programming and be located in the building. It is the consensus of the Park & Recreation staff that the building be removed and the present site upgraded for a larger park site in the Country Club area. BK:mk December 3, 1984 Leslie Turner 6710 Parkwood Lane Edina, MN 55436 Dear Councilwoman Turner, Re: Wooddale Site Again, we in the Country Club neighborhoodifind our sel,,es concerned about the future of the Wooddale Site and especially the schoD1 building. In its simplest terms --the school board chose to discontinue the use of the building as a walkable neighborhood school. In doing so, they halted the only practical, common sense use for the building: The land area is small, the traffic corner is congested, and the present park is small for such a high density neighborhood. The school board will not use the existing building as a school again, should the school population increase dramatically, since other buildings in the system which are newer and modern have been saved for that reason. The city hall can find any space needed in the old Edina East building, so could park and recreation or any number of other city departments. It appears then that since the only practical use is for a school (walkable neighborhood type) and that this use will not be Implemented that the remaining common sense approach is to raze the building and create green space. We have been working this empty building problem for 3-4 years. We understand the significance of Historic Restoration and Preservation --but whatuse will the building have if it is restored? It is obviously not in its original condition. Shall we pay to restore it and then wonder again what to do with it? I now need to address another issue concerning the group that seeks to save the building --the Edina Historical Society. It is my opinion that the Society and its members receive preferential treatment over the ordinary citizens of Edina. I will show two areas where I have recently observed this: 1. Foster Dunwoodie warm i^vited by the staff at City Hall to meet with the INDEPENDENT study firm of BRW during the study days on the Wooddale property. The neighborhood group found out in mid-November. I feel the study was completed when I talked with you, and even though you offered to arrange a meeting with BRW --the question was academic after I returned from a 10 day trip Nov . 23 and an article appeared Nov. 26 in the Sun that quoted the completed study. Why weren't we INVITED to meet with BRW? 2. This past weekend the Historical Society had a large sale in the Wooddale building. I attended the sale. I have several questions regarding the sale: 1. Did the Historical Society ask for permission to have the sale? 2. Did the Society pay the taxpayers of Edina rent for the use of the space? 3. Are the proceeds of the sale being shared with the city? 4. Would you grant me permission to have a sporting goods sale in the building? 5. Will the proceeds from the sale be used politically to further the ambitions of the Society and their views? One of the problems I see is that it seems to be assumed by members of the Council and the staff of city hall that the Historical Society and Preservation Board speak for ALL the citizens of Edina. Nothing could be further from the truth. As in the case of the Edina Mills Site --we in the neighborhood are very unhappy with the interpretation at the site and that it serves as the entrance to our neighborhood. I understand that at the time of the plans the neighbors spent a great deal of time working with those parties involved and were completely surprised by the outcome. There is a feeling here that we werenot dealt with openly and honestly. I have often wondered if there is not a conflict of interest with the architect that serves as advisor and consultant to these historic restorations and preser- vations and then has his own firm hired to do the work. Has anyone on the council ever wondered about that? In the last rounds of public meetings I noticed that Foster Dunwoodie spoke at least 20 minutes, presented slides, etc. to promote his point of view. Could I ask that in the interest of fairness all sides of the issue are heard for the same amount of time? Understand that the neighborhood group does not have a paid staff at their disposal for a smooth, professional presentation nor are we trained in the art of presentations. The citizens of Edina did not elect, ask, or encourage the Edina Historical Society to speak for them. Please do not assume that they do. It is my opinion that the school building be torn down, the land converted to green area --with a memorial to the school site and an attempt be made to connect the green areas at the intersection via bridge or tunnel. Sincerely, G� v Mary Kluesner cc:Council Members Richard4 Kelley, Bredesen Mayor C. Wayne Courtney Ken Rosland, City Manager Bob Kojetin, Parks and Recreation January 21, 1985 To the Director of Parks and Recreation and Park Board Members: After attending both sessions of the public information meetings on the Wooddale Site, Utley and theconcern of 50th Street, I wish to convey some observations to you. I was quite caught up in the fascination of tunnels, lagoons, monuments, reflecting pools, history centers, skating rinks, fire rings, canoe landings, plazas and organized development for both parks. After some time of thinking about these alternatives and some conversations in the Country Club neighborhood, I came to realize that what this total package proposes in almost all of the combinations of alternatives is the loss of our neighborhood parks. I am concerned that the pastoral setting of. Utley and the present informal use of the Wooddale Park and minimum use for summer recreation programs for grade school age children will be lost in the ambitious and over organized plans in the BRW a Itornat ives What BRW did not offer was the following --leave Utley Park as it is, create a maximum of passive green space and minimum of hard surface (which means razing the building) and treat 50th Street inits present width as a street that needs re -building and/or re -surfacing. To be specific, the most frightening remark made at the public meetings was the request that the parking lot in the 'new'Utley Park be large enough to accomodate a bus turn around. I envision a tremendous amount of activity with a history center there. School buses regularly, regular meetings in the historic buildings, antique sales, boutique sales and the like. Why should these activities be held in our neighborhood park? If the corner of 50th and Wooddale is already traffic congested -- why are we adding to -the problem? We know that the two buildings generate traffic problems, that is obvious on Eden Ave. Is Utley Park a logical place to transpose that activity? I propose that it is not. Cornelia Park with its large parking lot in place and large acreage already serving city wide interests may be a solution to the problem. I'm also wondering what people are going to be served by the proposed skating rink, canoe landing, fire ring etc. Our neighborhood skates informally at Arden Park, and isn't it true that the neighborhood rinks are being understaffed and under budgeted by Parks and Recreation in order to concentrate on the Braemar area? Are we building these proposed facilities for the use of those outside our .I ry I Y r7 (1 , A i f ..Ir. ? I t I,-, + I.. ' l J � � the 1 l ,J r -.., �, J 1 Vt"r'1� 1. i�li,n l�.i,� I�y .�ilU I I J�J, +�Ily -fJl lc 1. l.11 I IUi CIS are served in he V IU I asl MICU school days held in the Old Cahill School? Fine that our local children are --but if a great number of these groups are from outside our area, why is our neighborhood park being considered for this activity? I feel that our neighborhood with its high density should be allowed the privilege of a small green area that is informal in style, has reduced hard surface and offers a reprise from the activity of 50th Street and concentration of homes on very small lots. Many of us still resent the loss of the open green area at the Mill Site. I urge you to really consider first of all the needs of the neighborhood. The question to be asked is this, "Should the smallest neighborhood parks in the city be converted to city wide use and possibly Greater Metropolitan use?" Sincerely, Mary Kluesner 4409 Country Club Road Edina, MN 55424 cc: BRW