Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-03-13 Park Board Minutes1 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PARK BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL MARCH 13, 2012 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Steel called the meeting to order at 7:06 pm II. ROLLCALL Answering roll call were Members Dan Peterson, Jones, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Deeds, Jacobson, Hulbert, Weicht, Neville. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Dan Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Gieseke, approving the meeting agenda. Ayes: Members Dan Peterson, Jones, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Deeds, Jacobson, Hulbert Motion carried. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Member Dan Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Jones approving the consent agenda as follows: IV.A. Approval of Minutes – Regular Meeting of Tuesday, February 14, 2012 Ayes: Members Dan Peterson, Jones, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Deeds, Jacobson, Hulbert Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT None VI. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS VI.A. Highlands Park Athletic Field Proposal Mr. Keprios pointed out that his Staff Report and Recommendation states that the Edina Soccer Club (ESC) has requested to make a proposal to remove the softball/baseball backstop at Highlands Park and make room for a little bit larger practice area for the ESC. It would be used strictly as a practice venue. The ESC proposal is to remove the backstop, provide funding to provide grass for the infield and install irrigation. Mr. Keprios indicated that he mailed a letter on February 22nd to everyone who lives within 1,000 feet of the park which ended up being approximately 205 households and requested that people give their comments in writing. He noted that he has submitted all letters and emails that he has received as of 6:15 pm tonight to the Park Board. He indicated there seems to be a common concern from the neighbors which is the traffic. In addition, they are concerned about losing what is a community playfield amenity for the community neighborhood to use as a park as an unscheduled field for pick-up games, etc. Mr. Keprios showed some overhead pictures of the park. He added that the Edina Soccer Association (ESA) uses Highlands Park heavily during the summer evenings and weekends for games on the three fields. He noted that what the ESC is looking for is any green space that is somewhat level and safe to just use as a scheduled practice venue, it would not be a scheduled game field. He commented they are proposing not to add another game field but just want to improve what they are already using as a non-scheduled practice area. 2 Jeff Carlson, ESC Board Member, informed the Park Board there really is no space for their growing club which is basically an extenuation of the ESA where they have fewer people playing but it’s at a higher level of coaching and really is the feeder program into high school and college play. Mr. Carlson explained there are no tax dollars being proposed, they would be using their own funds. He pointed out that currently it is a non-assigned field for baseball and softball. He indicated that they had a record number of 250 kids try out at the youngest level which is 9 year-olds and because of the limited green space they had to cut 20% of that group. He commented that it could still be used for spontaneous baseball and softball, it just would not have the diamond. Member Gieseke asked Mr. Carlson in his estimation how does he expect the traffic flow to change. Mr. Carlson responded they already use that space so it would really just be any incremental use so any added traffic would really not be noticed. He indicated that these fields are used for 13 year-olds and older and at that age parents are typically just dropping off their kids and are not staying to watch the practice. Member Jones noted just to clarify in the future there is no intention to create this to be a scheduled field to which Mr. Carlson replied it would simply be scheduled for practices only by the ESC and not games. Member Cella asked if ESA games would be scheduled there. Mr. Carlson replied that is going to be left up to the City if they want to assign it for games. Mr. Keprios stated that from a City standpoint if this were to happen they would not accept reservations for games whether it is ESA or ESC. He added that he doesn’t think the area would even be large enough to accommodate either one, it’s strictly a small practice area. Member Segreto commented that she is a little confused about whether the backstop would stay or be removed. Mr. Keprios replied that the ESC came forward and requested that the backstop be removed to give them a safer, larger space for practice. Mr. Carlson stated that if needed as a compromise the backstop could stay and they would simply take away the diamond and would irrigate it and make it look like the rest of the space that is out there. Mr. Keprios indicated that may be a compromise the Park Board may want to consider to take the dirt out and replace it with healthy new grass and irrigate the space. He noted they could leave the backstop and everything in place and it could still be used for baseball and softball, it would just be without a dirt infield and it would also make the practice field a little bit smaller. Member Gieseke stated just to clarify when they say they are going to take the diamond away does that mean the bases are gone. Mr. Keprios replied they could put the bases back in but they would be removable bases so it could also be used for soccer. Chair Steel asked if adult softball uses the field to which Mr. Keprios replied they used to but now all adult softball is played at VanValkenburg Park. Mr. Keprios pointed out that this is a wonderful problem to have and he doesn’t want to paint ESC as the bad guys, they have provided thousands of hours volunteering to make this a fabulous program and help develop kids. He noted all of the associations volunteer thousands of hours of their time and this is really the symptom of a much bigger problem. As Member Deeds knows and has repeated many times we need more rectangular fields and that is something that will have to be addressed at a later date but that is why they are seeing this proposal. Member Deeds commented just so he understands you are talking about keeping the backstop but grass the infield so that it’s still useable for softball and baseball but will also function as a practice field for soccer. Mr. Keprios replied that would be a nice compromise. Member Deeds asked what months, how many hours and/or days a week would ESC want to schedule this field. Mr. Carlson replied it would be May through July during the evenings and weekends as well as September and October for fall soccer. 3 Bruce Carlson, 5208 Glengarry Pkwy, informed the Park Board he has lived in Edina for 60 years and during that time he has lived near six different Edina parks. He noted you talk about more green space but he thinks it has 98% green space with a little bit of gravel and even in the proposed new field it looked like it only needed a little bit of that gravel. Therefore, he is a little confused why the gravel can’t be striped and not schedule games on there and for that matter irrigate it and make the gravel softer if that’s the case. He noted that kids and neighbors gather at this park by the dozens and its unstructured play which is pretty unusual to finally see kids come back to unstructured play with pick-up games, etc. He commented that at a minimum he can’t see why they would eliminate the backstop and if need be the third base fencing if they needed that for space. He added if grass is put in there the kids are going to play and wear it out and it will turn to mud. Mr. Carlson noted that the biggest thing the neighborhood is most concerned about is the traffic, it is over the top. He noted if people were to park that may be one thing but as Mr. Carlson mentioned they come and go dropping kids off and picking them up. He added that their driveways and yards are utilized for parking as well as the “no parking” is utilized for parking which is really unbelievable being there are two parking lots which virtually go unutilized. He stated that as he suggested in his letter perhaps some serious education, communication and patrol responsibility should be required by the Associations and Clubs and they will participate as neighbors. He pointed out that he is also particularly concerned about the corner of Glengarry and Ayshire Blvd., there is a two-way stop sign there and there are nears misses there all of the time. Will O’Connell, 5532 Glengarry Pkwy, informed the Park Board he thinks they need to keep the baseball field because he sees there are 30 or 40 kids that live in the neighborhood that use it for baseball and kickball and it’s the only diamond in their neighborhood. Kate O’Connell, 5532 Glengarry Pkwy, informed the Park Board she has been a resident of Edina for 12 years, has three children and lives at the end of the park. She noted she would really like for the Park Board to not eliminate the ballpark. She indicated they use it all of the time for pick-up games of kickball and soccer and just to hang out and throw the ball around. She noted the kids are older so their yard is getting smaller for those amenities and they are at an age where they can ride their bikes to the park. She pointed out that her kids participate in soccer, hockey and baseball and they have gotten a lot of use out of all the wonderful programs that Edina has to offer but would ask that you also keep the unorganized spaces and reserve those for special community and neighborhood events. Ashley Hughes, 5500 Glengarry, informed the Park Board that she lives across the street from the park on the corner of Glengarry and Ayrshire. She indicated that she has five children ages almost two to 10 and they use the baseball field three or four nights and days during the summer months. She noted that it was one of the main reasons that drew them to this neighborhood especially to their home being right across the street from the park that has such a wide variety of activities for the kids from skating to the playground to the wide open space to the baseball field. She added that it’s a charming area that draws so many people to this neighborhood that makes it such a popular neighborhood and she feels it would just be a great loss to their neighborhood and to their children to lose the baseball field. Scott Reich, 5517 Chantrey Road, informed the Park Board that he has lived there for 17 years and one of the reasons he bought his house was because it’s near the park and he is raising two boys who like to play hockey, soccer and pick-up baseball. He commented that it’s a multi-purpose park and they do like to go there and play pick-up baseball; there are very few places now where you can go and do that and this one happens to be close to their home. He indicated that even when the park is being utilized by the ESC during the week it is so heavily used you can’t really even use it. He noted if you try to play baseball there you can’t because ESC is encroaching into everything. He stated that he is not anti- soccer, his kids play soccer but it’s a great facility just to come and play kickball, hang out, play baseball because there are few of these places and they are being converted into specific sports and if you look at some studies kids are better, well-rounded athletes if they play multi-purpose sports. 4 Matt O’Connell, 5532 Glengarry Pkwy, informed the Park Board that he has coached both baseball and soccer and he is well aware of the challenges that both groups face as far as finding enough spaces for their kids to participate within a certain time frame. He noted that his position is that he goes up with his kids to Highlands Park and brings a bucket of balls with and he will pitch to them but baseball isn’t really baseball with grass so that is where his position is as far as the compromise of taking out the dirt and keeping the backstop. Therefore, he would like to see that space stay the way it is because they do utilize it so much in their neighborhood just getting kids together and as a parent going up and simply being able to sit there and watch them play kickball or play catch and hit a ball. He noted that unstructured time is valuable and they don’t have enough of that right now as it is with the other activities that they participate in so that time is very important to them. Cathy Kidd, 5528 Glengarry Pkwy, informed the Park Board that they bought their house a year and a half ago because of Highlands Park, they looked everywhere and when they drove by and saw the pick- up games and kids that is something that is special. She noted that she has met so many people and neighbors because of that park. She indicated that it’s hard to find any time for anything and if you have a place where you can go to where her 13 year-old can play with the 5 year-old neighbor and they can work it out and play true baseball because it is gravel, and it is bases and it is sitting on the benches and they can pretend they are in the dugout and pretend and play. She stated that she thinks it would be a really poor choice to remove it. Paul Patzloff, 5508 Chantrey Road, informed the Park Board that he has been a resident for over ten years and there are a lot of different schools that the kids go to and it’s really nice to have that park where kids can go who go to a different school during the day can get together and meet their neighbors at the ball diamond. Dan O’Connell, 5532 Glengarry Pkwy, I walk to the baseball field with my mom and sister and I like the baseball field and we play soccer and kickball and added that he doesn’t want to wreck it down. Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that the ESC asked him whether or not they should fill the Council Chambers with their players to come and testify and tell the Park Board how much green space is needed. He noted that his reply to the ESC was that the Park Board is very keenly aware of the shortage of space issue and he asked ESC to please spare the Park Board another hour of testimony to prove that point, he didn’t think that would be necessary and that is why you don’t see a lot of the ESC players at this meeting. Member Jones asked Mr. Keprios to talk a little bit about the classification of the parks because she has been hearing that word “neighborhood” park. Mr. Keprios explained there are a variety of classifications, which they adopted from the “National Recreation Park Association”. He noted that Highlands Park is one of nine parks that they call “Community Playfields”, which community playfields typically range in size from 20 to 60 acres and are designed to provide facilities for diverse recreational activities for both young people and adults. In addition, a section is typically set aside for smaller neighborhood children and typically has a service area of anywhere from 9 to 16 square miles. The other eight community playfields are: Creek Valley, Garden, Lake Edina (which is now Fred Richards Golf Course), Pamela, Todd, VanValkenburg, Walnut Ridge and Lewis. He commented that they are all heavily scheduled venues because they don’t have the massive athletic complex like a Miller Park in Eden Prairie. Member Gieseke asked is there any kind of stripping for the fourth practice field right now or is it just green to which Mr. Keprios replied there is not. 5 Member Dan Peterson commented that in the diagram that was shown it looked like there was more space north of the third soccer field. Mr. Keprios replied that just to the east there is some playground equipment and a little further to the north you run into the lake and to west there is a grade change that goes up the hill. He noted that all three of those major fields are scheduled game fields and are heavily used by the ESA. Member Cella asked if it would be possible to push those fields a little further south to save that edge of the infield because on the diagram it looked like there was just a piece that was being taken. Mr. Keprios replied the diagram was just a quick analysis of trying to show in concept how it’s laid out but he doesn’t think that is exactly how staff lays them out and stripes them. He noted that they try to get as much of a soccer field in there for those three fields and the third field comes fairly close to the edge of that infield the way it is. The three fields are probably a little larger than he shows on the diagram. Member Deeds indicated that what he sees as a major change in going from unscheduled to scheduled in this area, if it’s scheduled from 3:00 to 9:00 weekdays, all day Saturday and part of Sunday, it is a major change that the neighbors are going to feel. He asked while soccer is running can the baseball/softball/kickball field be used or is it scheduled so tight with the soccer that essentially it’s an unusable space with the current scheduling. Mr. Keprios responded when the ESA has their games scheduled kids could use that infield but it would interfere with the soccer so they are not compatible when there are games scheduled. He added that is with the existing three fields and if you were to add the practice venue clearly you couldn’t do both. Member Gieseke stated that he has coached baseball and soccer and there are different ways to approach practice. He asked could they make it a half sized regulation field because currently it’s a ¾ sized field. He noted it would fit better and it would really accommodate and would not encroach on the infield, it could be a compromise. Mr. Keprios replied he thinks that would be more of a question for the ESC. He commented that the ESC is willing to provide some dollars and improve the park with new turf and irrigation and if they are going to do that they would like to be able to encroach on the infield and have it grass as well which would be a better venue for soccer. He indicated that if this were to happen there will be more traffic and he would venture to say that is probably the biggest issue for the neighbors than losing a backstop. Member Hulbert indicated that Member Gieseke brings up a really good point in that a lot of times you see two teams sharing a field; one playing on one half, the other playing on the other half. He stated that if they want to preserve having the gravel field maybe they could have alternate compromise by putting in a half size field out in what would be right field of the baseball field. He added that it wouldn’t have to be a small field; it could be a regulation half field if they are just using it for practicing and when they are not there then the neighborhood still gets to use the field. He commented that he is biased, he loved baseball as a kid, and he would hate to take that away and maybe they can find a creative compromise. Member Deeds asked Mr. Keprios if they are talking an increase in traffic, is Highlands particularly problematic in that sense relative to other ones in that same general classification. It does seem to have less parking and also seems to be more embedded in the middle of the neighborhood and asked is that with all of the parks or just Highlands. Mr. Keprios replied that he thinks what is different and unique about Highlands is it lacks off-street parking and people are already parking and turning around in the neighbor’s driveway. It’s a very big issue for the neighbors and in that respect it is unique. Member Gieseke stated in his opinion compromise seems to be the name of the game and asked if there are any parks in the city where they only schedule practice three days a week and Saturdays because that could be compromise to the neighborhood with the traffic to which Mr. Keprios responded no there is not. 6 Member Dan Peterson commented it’s a neat thing to hear how people meet their neighbors at the park and build friendships and watch their kids play a pick-up game of baseball or soccer. He noted he came in with the thought that things change and there are a lot more kids playing soccer for a lot of reasons it’s not that expensive to play and it’s an awfully good sport for athleticism but like most people in this room he loves baseball. He noted that he thought he would support the compromise but now he doesn’t think he will. Member Jones indicated to echo member Dan Peterson’s perspective and noted that her kids grew up playing at Highlands Park. She noted there really isn’t another option for people who want to play baseball and agrees with baseball you need to have dirt. Therefore, between that and saying they may want to increase the times that it is off limits to allow kids to play there seems to counter to everything that she has experienced with her own kids. She pointed out that when kids do their thing without scheduled games she wants to encourage that and if they take it away then they are going to build an area that doesn’t have that opportunity. Member Jones stated that the City should be working diligently to find rectangular fields for soccer, she doesn’t want to make the ESC out to be the bad guy because they are just looking at it as it’s a field and why can’t they use it. Member Cella stated that she is a mother of four kids who played soccer and she has a great understanding of the need for fields and she also has a great appreciation for neighborhood spaces and the idea of pick-up neighborhood and family pick-up games. She indicated that she supports this proposal only if they can find a way to work in some of the ideas that people were raising and questions. She noted if they made it half a field and observed the dirt infield she could see voting for it otherwise it would be very tough. Member Gieseke indicated that he can see both sides making sense and if they can push for further compromise, and it’s agreeable to the soccer folks, that would be something he would support but, if not, then they need to look elsewhere. Member Segreto commented that she has a keen appreciation of the need for extra rectangular fields in Edina but on the other hand she is a strong advocate of unstructured play and it seems to her that this neighborhood is already taxed to the max with traffic. She noted if she were to support any proposal it would have to be a compromise that would include the backstop and maintain dirt so that softball and baseball could continue to be played the way they should be played. Member Deeds noted as he stated previously they are woefully short of rectangular athletic fields in Edina, from the looks of it they have underfunded their amenities for the last 20 years so they are in this situation, they shouldn’t be but they are. He indicated that he understands the need for unstructured; however, dirt or no dirt is irrelevant to him he has played baseball on both. He stated that his next question is does the space remain unscheduled or scheduled and that is the crux of the issue. He commented that he is a firm believer in unstructured but they’ve got to have places for teams to practice and teams to play because they are talking about large associations serving a large community and a lot of kids. He noted, unless there is another way of doing this, the demand for fields in this community relative to what they have is so great that being able to bring on a half field for practice simply outweighs the uses that the neighborhood is putting it to. He added having a half a practice field for soccer given the demands is more valuable. They need to solve that problem and hopefully in the nearer rather than the longer term they can solve that problem by getting three or four more large rectangular athletic fields in the community. He stated he would support the current proposal keeping the backstop in place but he would support the proposal. 7 Member Jacobson indicated that she would agree with the compromise of putting in a half of a soccer field without disrupting the baseball backstop and the gravel area and mark out those areas so that it would at least delineate where they can be at the same time if that’s a possibility. She stated she would agree with the compromise. Member Hulbert stated he has multiple reasons that he would support maintaining the baseball as it is right now. He indicated if they convert it to soccer and baseball then it also creates a conflict of two sports in one area. He noted he thinks that neighborhood is extremely taxed with the programming at those fields and he would hate to see the creative play taken away; therefore, he would like to find a way and Member Gieseke had a nice idea to have another option on the table so it’s not necessarily taking some potential use away from the ESC. Member Weicht noted she thinks it’s important to have the baseball field there because there really isn’t anywhere else in that neighborhood where families could go play and she understands that more fields are needed but she feels like in that specific area there are enough places for soccer to play. Chair Steel noted that for her the issue that comes to mind is really the safety of the children, safety for the kids in the neighborhood as well as safety for the players. She indicated there seems to be a lot of interest in this compromise with the half field and asked the ESC to give some brief thoughts on that possibility. Mr. Carlson replied that he loves baseball and also has kids that play baseball so he can definitely empathize with the neighborhood; however, they are looking for options and he can appreciate everything that was said by the neighborhood. He noted that they certainly would like to look at the half space and added that currently they put four teams on the three fields that they have so they are already breaking them up into quarters. Mr. Carlson indicated that the space where the open ice rink is has dirt and asked if they could build something incremental for baseball back there. Mr. Keprios replied that it’s very difficult to have safe turf to play over an area that is used for a skating rink in the winter. Member Deeds indicated that he honestly doesn’t see compromising on the side of the field will make much difference because he thinks it still comes back to scheduled or unscheduled. He asked would the ESC be willing to compromise on the amount of time scheduled so rather than you want it five days a week and all day Saturday would you be willing to take half a Saturday and two or three nights a week so there is a serious compromise between community usage and the ESC usage. He commented that he thinks the issue is both traffic and scheduled versus unscheduled and so his question to the ESC would be will you compromise on the amount of time. Mr. Carlson responded that it’s hard for him to think that it would even be noticeable to have three fields scheduled for whatever they are using them for and to have that one extra piece to be scheduled for half that time that anyone would notice the difference because they are already there. Would anyone notice there would be that fewer amount of cars coming through the area? Member Deeds responded but it also leaves that space open for the kids to use it on those nights where if it’s scheduled it becomes unusable to them even if they were to back it up and just keep the little ground dirt in the infield area. He noted, however, it’s pretty difficult to play baseball without having any outfield space whatsoever so this is why he comes back to its scheduled versus unscheduled time and you have given him an answer which is you need it five nights a week and all day Saturday. Mr. Carlson replied but they don’t because they will take whatever the compromise ultimately is that the Park Board will push through if the ESC gets more space, incremental space and times then they are certainly going to stand in line and be ready to take it. Member Hulbert made a motion, seconded by Member Gieseke, to keep the baseball field but work with the ESC to try to create some sort of programming space in right field that maintains the baseball field for the neighborhood. 8 Member Deeds asked Mr. Keprios with the field as it stands have you looked at whether or not laying the field out this way is even feasible. Mr. Keprios replied that a practice field could be laid out whether there is new grass there or not. He stated that it’s going to be a question for the ESC; do they want to improve the grass without touching the infield and that is a question the ESC Board has to answer or do they feel their resources would be spent better someplace else. Mr. Carlson replied that would be accurate, they wouldn’t make that decision right now. Member Jones indicated that she appreciates trying to find a compromise in this but like Chair Steel she also wonders about the safety. In the one small area kids are playing baseball/softball/kickball, while there are soccer kids out on the soccer field and she is not so sure that is safe for either side; especially if they are going to be limiting this space. She also stated it’s going to increase traffic a little. In addition, she doesn’t think of Highlands as a neighborhood park but feels at least some areas should be open for the neighborhood. Member Deeds commented that this is a tough issue and it’s a choice between the wants and needs of the neighborhood and the wants and needs of the broader community of Edina and the kids. He noted they are going to have to make a call and they are probably going to come down on different sides but encouraged the Park Board to take a vote one way or another on it. Ayes: Dan Peterson, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Hulbert, Jacobson Nays: Deeds, Jones Motion Carried VI.B. Hornet’s Nest Working Group – Appointment of Chairperson Chair Steel commented that at their last meeting they approved the Hornet’s Nest Working Group but they didn’t appoint a chair person which has been their past practice. Member Hulbert made a motion, seconded by Member Dan Peterson, to nominate Member Jones as Chair of the Hornet’s Nest Working Group. Ayes: Dan Peterson, Jones, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Deeds, Jacobson, Hulbert Motion Carried. VI.C. Sports Dome Study Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that the Sports Dome Working Groups have come to the Park Board with a recommendation to enter into Phase Two of the feasibility study. Member Deeds stated that he would like to commend the Athletic Associations for the hard work they’ve put in to come up with another set of pro forma and that they are actually beginning to work on a schedule and beginning to lay out and map out who is going to have what and when, etc., which is quite encouraging. He added that it was a big help with good feedback and input. Member Hulbert asked what will Phase Two of the study cost to which Ms. Kattreh replied approximately $12,000. Mr. Keprios commented that staff fully supports the direction this is going and seconds Member Deeds thoughts, the Athletic Associations have really stepped up to plate in looking at hours and ways to help with the funding. Member Deeds informed the Park Board that those of them working on the Working Group, with the exception of Member Fronek who is no longer on the Park Board, will continue on with the Working Group. Member Cella asked who is on the Working Group so she knows who is making the recommendation. Member Deeds replied the following: Members Jones, Jacobson, Gieseke, Jacobson, Fronek and he as well at Ms. Kattreh. Member Cella asked if it was a unanimous recommendation with happy support behind it or more you are dragging your feet because you want to push it along. Member Deeds replied it was a happy unanimous support. 9 Member Jones indicated that as Member Deeds said they are very positive about the sports dome and she thinks it is entirely financially feasible. She informed the Park Board that one of the ways a different community was able to raise additional funds was to have donations from the community and that has not been explored at all in the current proposal. She pointed out that Minnetonka, for example, when they built their dome they had their sports associations as well as their citizens donate in a fund to help create that. She noted that she was able to get the 2010 year-end statements for the associations so she does not have the 2011 amounts but found the following for 2010 year-end: ESC balance was $460,455.00, EBA balance was $130,653.00, EFA balance was $28,716. She commented that she thinks this is not unrealistic for the City to ask of the sports associations to donate funds in order to show both their interest and their desire for the dome. Chair Steel asked if any members of the public wanted to speak to this item. Marty Probst, 5617 West 68th Street, informed the Park Board that his partner and he are from Champions Hall which is new facility across the street from Edina on Washington Avenue South. He noted that it is under renovation right now but that it will be a turf field as well as a multi-purpose building. He stated they have been working with the ESC as well as they have talked to the EBA, Lacrosse and Softball. He indicated that their goal originally was to put it in Edina but could not find any space. He pointed out that they are doing this completely with private funds, they are receiving no public funds in any way, shape or form. He added that the field will be 93 yards by 65 yards and it will be about 45 feet at the peak and about 36 feet high on the perimeter and it will be a vaulted roof. Terry Lynner, 6505 Shawnee Circle, informed the Park Board that he is Mr. Probst’s partner and co- developer of Champions Hall and indicated this is going to be a spectacular facility to offer to the athletes in Edina. He stated if you are looking for green rectangular space as Mr. Probst pointed out their turf field will be 93 yards by 65 yards with a hard roof and will be well lit. He noted in addition it will have a concession area, full set of bathrooms, locker rooms, very nice dining area and a place that both parents and kids will want to come to. Also, they are currently open for volleyball, they are going to have eight volleyball courts, and have volleyball every night and weekends. There will also be a trampoline park, curling and rock climbing vertical endeavors. He commented that he thinks this is very special and hopes you share in his excitement and would like for the Park Board to consider this as an alternative to building the dome because he thinks it will provide everything that the dome would provide and a lot more. Member Cella asked is phase two for location only or are there other questions that are part of phase two. Member Deeds replied that phase two is location and once that gets worked out then they get into the financing side of things. He explained that what’s been done so far is pro forma on the operating side of things; however, the capital side of things in terms of cost, etc., is going to be site dependent. He noted that the consultants stuck a 5 million dollar cost out there which he thinks is probably the high end of cost from what they can figure. He indicated what they know is essentially that it will probably not fully recover its costs on the operating side of things. He pointed out they can debate that later but it’s closer now in terms of the pro forma that they put together and the scheduling. Member Hulbert commented so the $12,000 is to try to determine what locations would be possible. He indicated this may be complicated with the golf dome going down and there may possibly be new opportunities. Also, it has changed a little bit from the meeting they had three weeks ago to now being full force where they are in support of studying phase 2. He commented he is curious if there is any logic to see what the tone of their work session with City Council is next week before they spend another $12,000 studying phase two. Chair Steel responded that Park Board is advisory to the City Council and they want to hear what our thoughts are on the issue and so she would hope that they would be able to take action one way or another tonight. 10 Member Dan Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Segreto, that the Park Board recommend going forward with phase two to the City Council for approval. Ayes: Dan Peterson, Jones, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Deeds, Jacobson Nays: Hulbert Motion Carried. VI.D. Countryside Park Playground Equipment Selection Working Group Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board they do have $330,000 in their CIP to make improvements at Countryside Park to do pathways and the replacement and relocation of the playground equipment. He indicated that he thought it would make some sense to have a little bit more involvement from the Park Board and would propose to appoint a working group or a member or two. He added as a reminder the bylaws require that a working group have the chair be a Park Board member. He stated that his intent would be to recruit people from the Countryside Park area to be part of this process to hear presentations from vendors, visit playground sites, and be actively involved in deciding the type of design that the new play structure would be. He noted that Ms. Kattreh is going to lead that charge and guide the group through the process. Member Deeds made a motion, seconded by Member Dan Peterson, to approve the motion that they have in front of them. Ayes: Dan Peterson, Jones, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Deeds, Jacobson, Hulbert Motion Carried. Member Hulbert noted that he would volunteer to do that. Member Segreto noted that she also would like to help. Chair Steel asked Member Hulbert if he would be willing to chair the working group to which he said yes. VI.E. Special Park Board Meeting Chair Steel stated that in past practice they have approved the members of working groups and therefore would like to be consistent with the Hornet’s Nest Working Group. She informed the Park Board that a public notice went out asking for resident participation in the working group and is proposing that the Park Board meet after their work session with the City Council on March 20th to approve working group members as they have solicited interest. Member Gieseke made a motion, seconded by Member Hulbert, to approve. Ayes: Dan Peterson, Jones, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Deeds, Jacobson, Hulbert Motion Carried. VI.F. Updated Work Plan – Revised as of March 6, 2012 Mr. Keprios commented that in the new work plan the changes that were made are in bold and went over those changes. He informed the Park Board that he is going to talk to the Lacrosse Association and bring the matter to the Park Board to vote whether or not they should even mail letters and go through a similar process rather than just have them show up at your next Park Board meeting. He indicated he thinks they are going to get the same results and that will save them the mailing and agony of going through another debate which will mirror what just happened tonight with Highlands Park. He noted he will discuss this with Chair Steel and they will decide the approach for it. Mr. Keprios pointed out that the Work Plan will always be a work in progress and stated that if anyone would like to see something added to the work plan or change something to give him a call and Chair Steel and he will discuss it. 11 Member Jones indicated she is going to be proposing a schedule for the Donations review process and public hearing and giving it enough notice and so she thinks they will need to move it back one more month. VI.G. Self-Assessment Survey – Louise Segreto, Park Board Member Chair Steel commended Member Segreto for bringing this forward she has done a lot of work on it and it’s a great item. Member Segreto informed the Park Board the she received an e-mail from Member Kathryn Peterson with some comments that she felt were very good. She noted that she thought it might be a bit too long for the purposes of administering it for Survey Monkey because Survey Monkey is limited to ten questions for free. Member Segreto noted that she is not averse to shortening the survey. She also commented that Member Kathryn Peterson felt because she is still new to the Park Board she could not answer some of the questions. Member Segreto noted that if someone is not in a position to answer a question then don’t answer it. She stated that she believes Member Kathryn Peterson’s last comment was that she was uncomfortable answering questions with respect to whether or not in their recruitment process they had wide enough diversity since she doesn’t know who each of the individuals on the board are. Member Segreto commented she thinks that is part of what she would like to address; get to know each other better and learn a little bit more about everyone before coming on the Park Board. Member Dan Peterson thanked Member Segreto for doing this and thinks it’s a good idea. He noted that he thinks it might also be helpful if everyone told a little story about them on a half-page. Member Gieseke pointed out that before they were appointed to the Park Board they filled out forms for the City Council to review with all sorts of questions such as what you do for a living, where you went to school, interests, volunteer positions, etc., so if they could have access to that it might be a quick and easy way of doing it. Mr. Keprios responded that’s a great idea; that he will gladly look into it and be sure it is public information. Chair Steel noted that she would like to volunteer and that she would be happy to help administer it in any way possible. Member Deeds explained to the Park Board that he has done a lot of surveys and he doesn’t think it’s worth the time, energy and effort to call it down to ten and put it on survey monkey. He noted because there are only 12 of them they can put it in an email format, someone can code it in a spreadsheet and it will take a lot less time. Chair Steel replied that she would be happy to do that. Chair Steel indicated that her only question is if there is any value to remaining anonymous in this survey or is everyone okay with sending her their thoughts. Member Jones replied she is fine with that and is glad they are doing this. Member Segreto asked if it would be logical to combine the orientation that was mentioned earlier if it’s talking about the role of the Park Board with this. Mr. Keprios replied he will be the one giving the orientation presentation and if the results are ready by the April 10th meeting he would be happy to put them in a power point format if she would like. Member Segreto replied she is not sure the results will be ready by then to which Mr. Keprios responded whenever the results are ready he would be happy to put it in a power point form and present it to the Park Board. Member Cella suggested there be a NA (not applicable) response in addition to the 0 through 10 responses for the new Park Board members who probably don’t know how to answer one-third of the questions. Member Cella pointed out an observation she had from the last meeting regarding the survey it’s a two-part survey; one was getting a better sense of who we are working with and foster a sense of community or bonding and working together and the other one was process. She noted the questions on 12 the survey seem to all be very process oriented as to how they operate but do not deal with getting to understand who they are working with. Member Segreto replied that she thinks it does because if they understand how people perceive what’s happening at their meetings they will have more insight into how to work with one another. She added that she doesn’t know how to begin other than to ask these questions and these are questions that appear in many, many non-profit surveys and doesn’t want to add to it. Member Cella replied she is not suggesting adding questions to the survey, she was just saying this survey fulfills one function and previously she had heard Member Segreto explaining another function as well but if this takes care of what you are looking at, then it’s fine and good. Member Deeds suggested a couple of things before being sent in his direction. He stated if they are going to use a scale he would suggest having 1 through 5 or 1 through 7 because it will give them superior results where 0 through 10 doesn’t work particularly well and it’s very hard to consolidate and figure out what the answers are. He commented that he would be happy to help with the formatting and such. Member Segreto stated that if it’s okay with everyone she would to work with Chair Steel and Mr. Keprios to finalize this and come up with a time and a place. Member Segreto made a motion, seconded by Member Dan Peterson, proposing that the Park Board undergo a self-assessment survey process as discussed at this meeting and attached to the agenda item. Ayes: Dan Peterson, Jones, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Deeds, Jacobson, Hulbert Motion Carried. VI.H. Donations Policy & Naming of Parks and Facilities Policy Working Group Update – Ellen Jones, Edina Park Board Vice Chairperson Member Jones informed the Park Board that the Naming and Donations Working Group has come up with two drafts to two proposed policies and gave the members a copy of those. In addition, she included a copy of the two current policies the City has. She noted that they are proposing the City have one uniform donation policy and procedure for all donations to the city regardless of the department in order to minimize confusion and conflict. She commented that in addition they also have a similar policy (just one) for naming for all facilities in the city. She indicated that they do recognize that the proposed policy may need to incorporate additional language to capture the needs of entities that the Working Group hasn’t thought about. She noted that the Working Group would like to receive questions and comments by March 23rd which will give them time when the Working Group meets on March 26th to discuss comments and suggestions and incorporate them into the proposed policy. She explained this will then go out to the public for comment on March 27th and on April 23rd the Working Group will compile all written comments from the public notice period and create a summary of those comments to discuss and when appropriate incorporate them into the proposed policies which will then be brought to the Working Group on April 27th where they will talk about it as a Working Group and on May 14th they would hold a public hearing at the Park Board meeting. VI.I. User Fees Policy Working Group Update – Keeya Steel, Edina Park Board Chairperson Chair Steel informed the Park Board they had one of their last meetings on Wednesday where they finalized their draft recommendation and sent it out to all of their working group members for final edits. She noted she is supposed to be receiving those on Friday and then she will forward them to Mr. Keprios and Mr. Neal for their feedback and to make sure they are not missing anything. It will then go back to the Working Group and they are scheduled to bring it before the Park Board meeting in May. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Mr. Keprios noted that he handed out a packet of other letters and received no petitions. VIII. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS 13 Member Deeds stated since they lost Member Fronek who was the chair of the Sports Dome Working Group they will need a new chair. Member Deeds made a motion, seconded by Member Gieseke to appoint Member Jacobson as chair of the Sports Dome Working Group. Member Gieseke seconded. Ayes: Dan Peterson, Jones, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Deeds, Jacobson, Hulbert Motion Carried. Member Dan Peterson indicated that after receiving the minutes from the Veterans Memorial Committee it seems they may be stumbling on who does what for fundraising and asked if there was anything the Park Board could do or any assistance from the staff to help. Mr. Keprios responded that the committee has actually taken a great big leap forward. He noted that Member Lonsbury put together a wonderful power point presentation to show to potential significant donors and they also recently met with General Schulstad, an Edina resident, who has agreed to be honorary chair for the fundraising committee. He added that General Schulstad will also be introducing the committee to some individuals whom he believes may have a strong interest in donating to the memorial so they are moving in the right direction. Chair Steel thanked the Park Board again for electing her as chair and hopes to get to know everyone better over the next year. She commented that if anyone has any ideas or concerns or anything to feel free to contact her or even if it’s just to get to know one another. IX. STAFF COMMENTS Mr. Keprios informed the Committee that they’ve planted flowers in front of City Hall today which is a first and they are breaking records all over the place and they have flowers blooming in their greenhouse which they are going to have to get out soon because it has been that warm. Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board there have been people out using the tennis courts so he thinks it was a good move to leave the nets up year around; he has even seen people using them this past January. Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that the driving range and executive course are now open for business, they opened last weekend. Member Keprios thanked their student member for speaking up tonight because they need to hear their voices. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 pm