Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-08-11 WS 5 pm Park Board Minutes1 MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA PARK BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL August 11, 2014 5:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Gieseke called the meeting to order at 5:04 p.m. II. COMMUNITY SURVEY WITH UNMET NEEDS ASSESSMENT – Facilitated by Ron Vine, ETC Institute Ms. Kattreh introduced Ron Vine of ETC Institute. Ms. Kattreh noted the goal of this workshop and feedback is to help expedite the upcoming community survey, to help provide a solid basis for working on the future of Fred Richards as well as the Park Master Plan. Mr. Vine provided some history of his professional background, including the 2006 needs assessment he completed for the City of Edina. Mr. Vine noted he has completed about 400 surveys related to master park planning. He believes the survey has to be integrated seamlessly in order to get the master plan to work. Generally, the kinds of master plans done today are a combination of a long-range and a short-range plan. Member Deeds asked how he would handle public input on two parcels in Edina: Fred Richards and Grandview. Mr. Deeds stated the survey has to have a lot of macro questions, as well as very specific options and questions about the frequency of use. He would start giving very specific options on about page four of the survey, after going through unmet needs. In response to a question by Member Segreto, Ms. Kattreh indicated the goal is to turn this around very quickly, and the draft should be available by the end of the week. The Park Board will then be able to review and comment. Mr. Vine noted he would like to send out the survey right after Labor Day. Member Steel asked about the expedited timeline; Ms. Kattreh responded it is because she was asked to do it in an expedited manner by a member of the City Council in order to assist with the Fred Richards decision. Member Steel stated Edina residents have a hard time deciphering between school/community education and city parks and recreation. She suggested there be a clear distinction made so there is less confusion. She would like a question to address what residents are participating in if they are not participating in city programming. Mr. Vine stated he likes to begin with the questions about what residents are participating in now, and then move to vision, needs, unmet needs, priorities, and sustainability, concluding with demographics. Chair Gieseke stated he would like information about trends in other communities. Member Segreto asked about the process of handling people’s suggestions for community needs. 2 Mr. Vine responded that he believes 98 percent of the survey should be closed-ended questions, followed by giving respondents a few chances to suggest things. Member Jones stated she would like to be open to new and innovative ideas. Mr. Vine responded that information will be gathered by mining the respondent information carefully. Member Deeds asked about the Senior Center questions on the survey. Mr. Vine suggested focusing on activities and programming and see how the facilities match up. Member Steel noted that some people like the activities of the Senior Center, but do not like the idea of participating there because of the name “senior” in the title. Mr. Vine stated the issue of golf is very interesting, because Fred Richards is closing down. He suggested dividing things by needs/unmet needs by indoor and outdoor. Member Steel suggested focusing on questions of socialization and possibilities for it. Mr. Vine noted some communities have addressed that aspect by questioning about what are the benefits of living in the city. Member Steel noted the recent community survey (not conducted by Mr. Vine) reported that 35 percent of residents use community programming, but 99 percent are satisfied with the offerings available. Mr. Vine highlighted various ways to look at performance measurements. He also discussed the matrix of importance and satisfaction. Member Deeds suggested consolidating some types of questions in order to leave space for other types of questions. Member Greene asked about benchmarking these types of surveys. Ms. Kattreh noted the city has agreed on the priority of conducting a quality-of-life survey every two years. We could consider a similar update to this survey. Mr. Vine stated questions about needs/unmet needs are generally longer-term surveys. Satisfaction and usage are where big strides can be made. Perhaps every two years, a quarter of this survey can be re-done. Mr. Vine noted this survey will be sent out to 3,000 households, and those people will also have the opportunity to complete it online. If 600 are not received back, phone surveys will then happen. Mr. Vine noted there will be some weighting in the results; if it gets too significant, phone surveys will have to be done. Over-sampling may be done surrounding the Fred Richards area. Member Steel suggested asking about use of L.A. Fitness and additional need for walking trails. Member Deeds asked if they go outside the city for athletic facilities. Mr. Vine noted sometimes a need is being met outside the city. What needs to be focused on are the areas of importance where needs are not being met. 3 Member Steel noted it would be helpful to note what populations the private businesses serve, because as demographics shift, more programming might be necessary. Mr. Vine noted this is enough quantity for a 10-page survey, so it is important to focus on the core areas. Ms. Kattreh noted that if anything else comes up in the next day or two, she can forward it on to Mr. Vine. The work session adjourned at 6:01 p.m.