HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-14 Park Board Minutes 1
EDINA PARK BOARD
7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
SEPTEMBER 14, 1999
____________________________________
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chuck Mooty, Andy Herring, Linda Presthus, George Klus, Karla
Sitek, John Murrin, Dave Fredlund, Floyd Grabiel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Andy Finsness, Bill Jenkins, Tom White
STAFF PRESENT: John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton, John Valliere
OTHERS PRESENT: Gary Nyberg, Kirt Briggs, Dave Lees
____________________________________
I. APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 11, 1999 PARK BOARD MINUTES
Chuck Mooty MOVED TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 11, 1999 PARK BOARD
MINUTES. Dave Fredlund SECONDED THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED
II. WOODDALE PARK COMFORT STATION PROPOSAL
Mr. Keprios introduced two members from the Wooddale Neighborhood Committee, Kirt
Briggs and Dave Lees. He noted these two gentleman have been very active participants
in this group. He then introduced Gary Nyberg, President of SGN and also an Edina
resident who was filling in for Jon Brakke, the lead architect on this project who was
unable to attend the Park Board meeting.
Mr. Keprios explained some of the history behind this issue and indicated that a lot of
different renderings were shown to the neighborhood committee in which they have
responded to all of them one way or another.
Mr. Keprios explained that he has also spoken to the Rice family about moving the Greg
Rice Picnic Shelter to Utley Park, in which they are supportive if we need to do that. The
architect then came up with a drawing putting the new shelter building where the current
one is located. He noted that the new shelter would have one unisex bathroom and a
utility room. Mr. Keprios stated that the color plan in the packet is what the committee
unanimously agreed upon. He commented that there is still one item that needs to be
decided upon and that is the cupola. He pointed out that the architect has done a good
job of matching the facility with the architecture of the neighborhood.
2
Mr. Keprios commented that a lot of wonderful ideas were borne out of this
neighborhood committee and they will continue to keep in touch with them as Wooddale
Park is further developed. Mr. Briggs stated that by getting the neighborhood involved
everyone was able to voice their opinion. He noted that by the end everyone was in
agreement that the structure fit the need and also enhanced the overall setting of the park.
Mr. Murrin asked is this comfort station going to have a keyless entry system in which
Mr. Keprios replied yes.
Mr. Fredlund asked if the structure they were shown is the $85,000 structure in which Mr.
Keprios replied yes, however that is a rough guess and they are hoping that amount will
be on the high side because of only having one restroom. Mr. Fredlund commented that
the architectural fees seem to be exorbitant. Mr. Keprios explained that amount will
include everything from day one when the first building was designed.
Mr. Mooty indicated that he thinks this is a very attractive facility and is glad that there
was a consensus with the group because that is very important. He noted that he is very
much in favor of what is being proposed.
Mr. Klus stated that he also thinks this is a great looking facility, however, he has one
question and that is why is there only one restroom. It was noted that the group felt one
restroom would meet the demand. The size of the facility was a big issue. Mr. Klus asked
what has been the city’s policy when the other comfort stations were built, why has there
been two restrooms and not one. Mr. Keprios replied that from his perspective people
feel it is more socially acceptable to have two restrooms even when there may not be the
demand to have two restrooms.
Mr. Fredlund indicated that the proposed facility has one water closet and no urinal and
asked wouldn’t it be more sanitary if there were a urinal. Mr. Nyberg stated that is a good
question and noted they definitely went around with that question. He pointed out that a
urinal would fit and would still be handicapped accessible. He stated that he polled the
women in his office and more of them indicated that they would not feel comfortable with
a urinal in the restroom. Mr. Keprios commented that, if necessary, it would not be an
expensive addition.
Mr. Herring asked how much does this cost compared to the original cost for this facility.
Mr. Keprios replied that is tough to answer because the comfort stations were bid along
with all of the other shelter buildings in on lump sum bid. Mr. Herring asked that he
would like a sense as to whether we are spending more or less on this one than the
original design. Mr. Keprios indicated that he is hoping it will be less because we have
one less restroom, however, there is an extended roof line. Mr. Herring noted that for
some reason $96,000 sticks out in his mind in which Mr. Keprios replied he projected
3
that the original design would cost around $100,000. Mr. Herring indicated that in a
sense it’s the architectural fees that are bumping this amount up because it’s been done a
few times. Mr. Herring asked if this comfort station is consistent with the architecture
that we used for the other comfort stations throughout the parks in the city in which Mr.
Keprios replied it is very close.
Mr. Herring indicated that the report states that the funding for this project will come out
of the Developer’s Fund and asked if the Park Board has any input on that because he
would not like to see it taken from there. Mr. Herring stated that he would prefer to use
some other resource other than the Developer’s Fund. Mr. Keprios explained that the
comfort station for Wooddale Park was always meant to be part of the referendum.
Money was borrowed from the Developer’s Fund to finish the Aquatic Center
development. When the Aquatic Center paid back those funds, those dollars were to be
used to finance the construction of the comfort station at Wooddale Park. He stated that
by law the money from the referendum had to be spent within a 24 month period. He
indicated that was the strategy used to bankroll the money for the construction of the
comfort station. Mr. Herring asked if the $140,000 is the amount that has been paid back
in which Mr. Keprios replied yes. He noted that Mr. Wallin, the Finance Director, has
informed him that another loan payment will also be made from the Aquatic Center. Mr.
Herring asked Mr. Keprios if he knew what that amount is. Mr. Keprios replied that the
juggling of funds to finance these projects is somewhat complicated and might be best
explained by the Finance Director. Mr. Keprios asked if it would be beneficial to the
Park board to have the Finance Director attend the next meeting to address these
questions. Mr. Herring noted that would be helpful.
Mr. Mooty pointed out that the current balance in the Developer’s Fund is $249,000, and
the approximate cost for the comfort station is $108,000, therefore the Developer’s Fund
would go down to approximately $140,000. Mr. Keprios replied that is correct. Mr.
Keprios also noted that the playground equipment for Wooddale Park would not come
out of the Developer’s Fund but he is proposing it to come out of an old capital fund
balance that has been in our back pocket for a rainy day since the day we were told that
funding to the capital fund was cut.
Mr. Herring indicated that he wants to make sure he understands the money situation. He
noted that he has been on the Park Board a long time and the Developer’s Fund used to
have a significant amount of money in it. He stated that he feels it would be very
beneficial to have the Finance Director attend a Park Board meeting because this is an
issue for him. Mr. Herring also stated that if the Developer’s Fund is how is has just been
described then he is okay with taking money from the Developer’s Fund for the comfort
station.
Mr. Klus asked about the old capital budget reserve. Mr. Keprios explained that he was
reserving the old capital plan balance to make up for projects that went over budget on
the referendum. He was saving money from an old capital plan for a rainy day.
4
Mr. Herring commented that the issue of putting in a comfort station at Wooddale Park
has been around for a long, long time and he would like to commend the neighborhood
committees and staff who have worked on this because there was a lot of perseverance.
Mr. Keprios indicated that he would also like to thank the architect because he was very
responsive to the committee’s input and has designed an aesthetically pleasing and
functional building.
Chuck Mooty MOVED TO ACCEPT THE STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED COMFORT STATION AT WOODDALE
PARK. Linda Presthus SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED.
It was asked when will construction begin in which Mr. Keprios replied that he will be
working with the architect to determine what is the best time line financially to bid the
project. The question becomes, do we bid it now and give them a longer date to complete
it or do we ask for them to complete it over the winter. We will go forward with
whatever is in the City’s best interest financially.
Ms. Sitek asked Mr. Keprios if he is concerned that we are setting a bad precedent by
asking the neighborhood want they want in the park, especially to this extent where we
have spent so much money on architects and re-plumbing. Mr. Herring commented that
without listening to the neighbors we were getting ready to spend $100,000 on something
they didn’t want. He stated how could we tell taxpayers we are going to spend your
money to build something you don’t want. Ms. Sitek replied that it’s her park too. Mr.
Herring noted he understands that and that is why they actually did get a lot of input on
this. Mr. Fredlund indicated that it seems like a nice compromise. Mr. Keprios noted
that the lesson learned is that we should have asked the neighborhood first because then
we wouldn’t have ended up with such exorbitant architect fees, relocation and design
changes.
III. WOODDALE PARK PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL
Mr. Keprios noted that as his reports indicates it will cost approximately $7,000 to $8,000
to correct what is wrong with the playground equipment. He stated that Wooddale Park
and Normandale Park are the top two that need to be replaced. He pointed out that he
was planning to replace both playgrounds this year, however, he was not planning on not
having any capital funding for the past three years. He commented that, as his staff report
points out, staff recommends that Wooddale Park needs to be done more so than
Normandale Park.
Mr. Klus asked if there are the same safety concerns at both Wooddale and Normandale
Park. Mr. Keprios replied he feels Wooddale is a more hazardous condition because of
the sidewalk around the play structure where the safety surface sand is constantly being
dumped on the sidewalk creating a dangerous condition. That is the difference between
the two parks as to which one you would do first because there is only enough money to
5
do one. Mr. Klus asked if the money for this is coming out of the Developer’s Fund. Mr.
Keprios responded that will come out of the old capital fund remaining balance.
Mr. Fredlund asked if the risk assessment was done at Normandale Park as well. Mr.
Keprios indicated that it was not, however, it is pretty much the exact same structure.
Ms. Sitek indicated that she is still concerned about not doing Normandale Park and
doing Wooddale Park. Mr. Herring stated that he is having a hard time picking one park
over another even if there is one differentiation point between the two.
Mr. Keprios stated that the options at this time are to either do one park or not do any
parks, because there is not enough money to do both. Mr. Murrin asked if statistically we
could prove that Wooddale Park has more foot traffic, activity, sand problems, etc. Mr.
Keprios replied that they cannot prove that statistically.
Ms. Sitek asked what park programs are held at Wooddale Park in which it was noted
there were some girls softball games played there this year. Ms. Sitek stated that
Normandale Park is heavily scheduled with boys baseball games.
Mr. Murrin stated that since Wooddale Park is getting a new comfort station maybe it’s
appropriate to do the playground equipment at Normandale Park first. Mr. Mooty
indicated that in fairness to Wooddale Park, they were not originally in favor of the
comfort station and it was not necessarily high on their list whereas the playground
equipment would be high.
Mr. Mooty asked if it would be possible to do both of the playgrounds and hold off on the
comfort station for a year and see whether we get the dollars. Mr. Keprios replied that the
City Council has directed him to build a comfort station at Wooddale Park.
Mr. Herring opened the floor if someone wanted to make a motion, however, he stated
that he would vote against just putting in playground equipment at Wooddale Park. Mr.
Fredlund asked would there be adequate funds if we zeroed out the Developer’s Fund and
did both parks. Mr. Keprios replied he can’t make that statement right now because
everything is in such flux right now with the park shelter buildings and comfort stations
contract finishing up and the transferring of funds. He stated that he will know more in a
few weeks.
Mr. Herring suggested to table this issue, especially since construction would not be
started until next spring. Mr. Keprios indicated that they can definitely delay this issue
until we know more about different sources of funds for these projects.
Mr. Mooty asked if staff could look into the possibility of doing both parks in stages
where we would use part of the equipment that’s currently there so we could fix the safety
issues and then phase in the rest when dollars become available. This way both could
potentially be under way. Mr. Keprios stated that they cannot re-grade the site until all of
6
the playground equipment is taken out. However, we could possibly pull out what we
believe to be the most hazardous and just hang in there until we have the money to do the
rest.
Mr. Herring asked Mr. Keprios to look into financing both parks and come back with
information for the next Park Board meeting.
John Murrin MOVED TO TABLE THIS MATTER UNTIL THE NEXT PARK BOARD
MEETING. Dave Fredlund SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
IV. FEES AND CHARGES
Mr. Keprios explained the reason he has only listed the fees and charges for the adult
sports is because it is a timely issue. He noted he would like the Park Board’s approval
for these 1999-2000 season fees.
Mr. Keprios indicated that at the last Park Board meeting there was a discussion on the
rental of ice for bandy. He stated that staff would like to charge $120.00 per hour this
year as opposed to the $60.00 that was charged last year. This is still a little less than half
of what the John Rose Memorial Minnesota Oval is charging. Mr. Keprios commented
that the bandy participants have indicated that they may not be willing to pay that amount.
However, if these fees are passed he will get a commitment out of the bandy participants
that either they pay the fee or there will not be a bandy rink. Mr. Herring stated this must
have been calculated out so it is close to $16,400. Mr. Keprios replied that he and Mr.
MacHolda talked about this at length and calculated it out a couple of different ways.
First, if we assumed the only reason for having the rink is because of bandy then the total
cost should be divided out by the total number of hours they use in a season. This would
equate to a charge of approximately $350 an hour to cover all expenses. However, if you
divide that by the total number of hours they could purchase in a season it would be only
$35.60 an hour. Secondly, we can look at what they charge for ice at the Roseville Oval,
which is artificially refrigerated ice that is resurfaced by a Zamboni in between every
game. Not being apples to apples with the Oval, renting the Lewis Park bandy rink for
half of the Oval’s price would be fair. Ms. Sitek asked what do they charge at the Oval in
which it was noted $240.00 an hour and according to their Park Director, that price is
likely to be even higher this year. Ms. Sitek replied if the bandy people really want a
bandy rink in Edina, they will pay it.
Mr. Herring stated that the theory here has always been that the users pay for their use and
we should no longer subsidize that service. It was also noted that bandy is the only non-
resident athletic program we offer. Ms. Sitek indicated that her husband played on the
first bandy team and it used to be free. Ms. Presthus commented that if we raise the bandy
fee this might help solve the issue and they won’t want to play in Edina anymore and we
could then change the area into a soccer field.
7
Mr. Klus asked how are the other fees figured. Do you try to get a certain percentage of
revenue to offset the expenses? Mr. Keprios replied that we do not lose money on our
sports programs. If anything, we make a little money to cover capital expenses that pay
for facility improvements. Mr. Herring stated that we don’t always cover all of our
expenses because it doesn’t cover staff’s time, etc. Mr. Herring commented that the
neighborhood does enjoy the large sheet of ice and it is a benefit to them. Ms. Sitek
noted that it is her understanding that this may be the last year we offer bandy.
Mr. Grabiel indicated that he is a little concerned that for adult basketball we charged
$400.00 in 1999 and made money and we are now raising it to $425.00. He asked why is
it that government can raise fees higher than the rate of inflation. Mr. MacHolda replied
the fee has been raised because they are going from a 10 game schedule to a 12 game
schedule, which is budgeted at a break-even proposition. Also, a third play-off bracket
was added to the post-season, which adds additional expenses. He noted that the
expenses for basketball are officials, registration with the state, purchasing state berths,
trophies, t-shirts for the winning team, basketballs and scorebooks, so it’s a wash.
George Klus MOVED TO APPROVE THE FEES AND CHARGES FOR THE ADULT
ATHLETICS. Karla Sitek SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
V. YEAR 2000 BUDGET AND CAPITAL PLAN
Mr. Keprios indicated that everyone should have received in their packet a copy of the
budget which he has proposed to the City Manager who will then make a proposal to the
City Council. He stated that he liked the process this year because he was given the
opportunity to tell the City Council what he felt were the most critical needs in the Park
and Recreation Department. Mr. Keprios stated that the numbers of facilities and park
acreage have grown and the expectation of the customer has gone up. However, the total
number of staff has actually declined in the past decade. Mr. Keprios noted that for the
most part they are looking at a 2 ½% to 3% increase across the board whether it is for
general supplies or professional services. Mr. Keprios explained that where they fall the
shortest is with the capital plan. He noted that one might ask why do you need more
money if you just finished up with a 10 million dollar referendum. The reason being is a
lot of what they did with the referendum money was for maintenance. Mr. Keprios
pointed out that the number one question he received at almost every one of the 40
referendum informational meetings was why haven’t we kept up the maintenance.
Therefore, we need a capital plan just to keep up with maintenance so we don’t find
ourselves back doing another referendum in the near future. Mr. Klus asked what is the
City Council’s view on this. Mr. Keprios replied they have not yet heard the capital plan
issue. The staff is currently working very hard right now with the Finance Department,
City Manager and a few others to find alternatives to fund a capital plan in this seemingly
endless era of levy limits. We need to find some alternate sources of funding whether it
be through enterprise facilities, liquor stores, utility fund, etc. to find a creative way to
fund a long-term capital plan.
8
VI. COMMUNITY CENTER STUDY - CHUCK MOOTY
Mr. Mooty indicated that he and Mr. Keprios attended a meeting today with a lot of other
people from City Hall, the School District, Community Center and a group of architects
to discuss various issues. He stated that in going through the generic proposals everyone
was in support of the concept of trying to enhance the overall community center with the
idea that there would be a referendum that would be voted on sometime in May 2000. Mr.
Mooty explained that right now the issue is trying to figure out what will actually fit in
the space as well as make sure that the assessment has been made of maximizing where
those facilities should be put. For example, how much should be put at the community
center and how much at other potential sites. He stated that if everything works out,
construction could start in November or December of next year. Mr. Mooty pointed out
that hopefully everything will be further defined in the next six weeks with the goal of
having this plan put in place around the first of November. This is also the same time
frame when the Kunz Lewis site should be defined as far as what will ultimately be
proposed for that location.
Ms. Sitek asked if this is going to be Park and Recreation maintained in which Mr. Mooty
replied that it will be maintained by the schools. However, it would be a city referendum
and therefore the dollars for the election for the referendum would be coming primarily
from the city. Mr. Murrin asked Mr. Mooty how he feels about the concept and how it can
help the city. Mr. Mooty responded he thinks he is the wrong person to ask because he is
very biased on the whole thing. He noted that this referendum would provide for
additional gymnasiums that we so badly need here. Mr. Mooty stated that this is the most
economically wise approach by keeping most of this at the community center, which is a
centralized location. Mr. Mooty explained that the library would be part of the Kunz
Lewis site, which would also incorporate a senior center.
Mr. Murrin pointed out that Mr. Mooty has been a very active and an integral part of the
fundraising effort and has heard he has been just marvelous. He stated that this needs to
be a community effort that will benefit the whole community. Mr. Mooty commented
there have been a lot of people working on this, however, the question is whether the
community be in support of it when it’s time to vote.
Mr. Fredlund asked if any figures have been discussed for the referendum in which Mr.
Mooty replied that realistically they are looking at somewhere around 8 million dollars or
possibly even more. Mr. Herring asked what will we get for 8 million dollars. Mr.
Mooty noted the football stadium, storage facility underneath, potential remodeling and
relocation of the track, concessions and restroom. It also includes a field-house which
would include gyms, running tracks and fitness type capabilities for training. The
remodeling of the current facilities is also included in the 8 million. Mr. Fredlund asked
if there are going to be three new gymnasiums. Mr. Mooty indicated that is the concept
right now with a potential fourth gym at another school site. Mr. Mooty explained that
9
the goal for the Kunz Lewis site is to have the library and senior center basically paid by
the person developing that particular property.
Mr. Keprios indicated that he would like to see an additional excess levy referendum on
the ballot to approve an additional levy to pay for operational expenses at the new senior
center. He explained that he is concerned if a senior center is built there may not be
enough money within our current operating budget to pay for additional operating
expenses for a new senior center.
Mr. MacHolda asked Mr. Mooty if he anticipates any other groups, such as the Edina
Swim Club, asking to be part of this referendum. Mr. Mooty replied that he thinks the
Edina Swim Club would definitely love to see a new pool built, however, he feels the
reason this even has legs right now is because the school is willing to take on the
maintenance. The cost of the maintenance should not be an incremental cost to a
significant degree, however, with a pool it would be very different and he doesn’t think
the school would be interested in that. He stated that to get this referendum through, a
pool should not be part of it at this time. Mr. Mooty indicated that his goal would be to
try to do this in a way that doesn’t necessarily prohibit the Edina Swim Club from being
able to propose a competitive pool in the future. Therefore, that is why at this time he
would not like to take up the space at Valley View if we don’t need to. This way the
Edina Swim Club will know that we are not totally voiding the ability to ever do it but
will have to wait and see.
Mr. Herring asked why would the city pay for the football stadium. Mr. Mooty indicated
he thinks the view on this is that it’s a community project no different than the
gymnasiums. Also, the goal will be to have the stadium used a little bit more than it is
currently being used, possibly it could be used for soccer games. Mr. Herring commented
that he assumes they are going to have rights to use these facilities. Mr. Mooty stated the
School District would have the first right. Mr. Herring agreed that the schools will
always have the first priority and the city will be second, just like it is now at the
facilities.
Mr. Mooty pointed out that after going through this, it all comes down to it’s the same
dollar whether it’s coming through the city or through the school. He stated that this is
something we need, it’s all a community element and his goal is to see it get done.
Mr. Herring asked if anyone has looked at the demographics on basketball. He stated that
he knows we are really jammed on gym space, but looking to the future are the numbers
there to support this number of gymnasiums in say five years. Mr. MacHolda replied
that currently the numbers could support twice as many gymnasiums, the sport has
exploded and yes, the numbers will still be there. Ms. Presthus confirmed there was a
group working on the demographics a few years ago and those numbers have been run.
Mr. Mooty stated that the greatest concern is not having enough, however, we need to
find the balance of whether the people are willing to support this without trying to get
overly aggressive on what they would like to do. Mr. MacHolda commented that soccer
10
is another game that would like indoor space. You can play basketball and volleyball in
the gymnasiums but you cannot play soccer, therefore, that is another group that’s fairly
large who could utilize gym space.
Ms. Sitek stated that she has heard that the school is sometimes not very reasonable in the
way they allocate things in what they say yes and no to. Therefore, she thinks it’s
important to be careful that they don’t have full say in everything because she has found
them to be less than reasonable. Mr. Mooty noted that there will be some type of an
arrangement as to how these facilities will be operated. Mr. Keprios explained that, in his
view, the city and the school work very closely together on the collaboration of facilities
in a manner that best serves the community.
VII. OTHER
A. Donations - Mr. Keprios indicated that he was hoping to have the donation
memorial policy on the agenda with a recommendation. However, he has found that it is
not as easy to come up with a proposed policy as he had hoped. He noted that Mr.
Valliere has had some great input with regards to what he is doing at the golf course. Mr.
Keprios informed the Park Board that he will be meeting with the Historical Society in
October and will ask them to come up with some creative ideas to pay tribute to and
memorialize people who have passed away who have done wonderful things for the City
of Edina. He will also come up with an idea on how we can approach some of these
proposals for donations and memorials. Mr. Keprios stated that after this he will bounce
these ideas off of his staff and give them one more shot at it. At that time he hopes to
have a policy ready to present to the Park Board.
B. Community Requests - Mr. Keprios handed out a copy of a petition he received
from young residents who would like to see Edina build a skate park. He noted that he
also received a request to build a horseshoe pit as well as an archery range. Mr. Keprios
stated that he likes to keep the Park Board up to date on comments he receives from the
community.
C. Soccer Goals - Mr. Murrin indicated that someone asked him to bring up the topic
of the safety of our soccer goals. Apparently this was on a recent “60 Minutes” where
there have been deaths with these goals falling over. He asked what is the situation in
Edina. Mr. Keprios noted that he did ask the Park Superintendent and Park Foreman how
our soccer goals are secured. He was told we are doing our part in that most of them are
permanent goals and are buried in concrete so that they will not move. However, there
are a few portable goals, which are only anchored to the ground, however, kids and adults
do occasionally find a way to pull the anchors out of the ground to move the goals to a
different location on the field.
D. Community Education Services Board Meeting - Mr. Keprios noted that he was
recently invited to attend the Community Education Services Board meeting to discuss
some joint publicity ideas, especially to new residents of Edina. Therefore, they are
11
looking at different ideas in which we may no longer have an activities directory but
something else. It was a very good discussion.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
George Klus MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:20 P.M. John Murrin
SECONDED THE MOTION. MEETING ADJOURNED.