HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-11-12 Park Board MinutesEDINA PARK BOARD
7:30 p.m.
November 12, 1996
MEMBERS PRESENT
MEMBERS ABSENT
STAFF PRESENT:
Bill Jenkins, Idith Almog, Beth Hall, Jean Rydell
Andrew Montgomery, Dave Crowther, John Dovolis, Mike Burley,
Andy Herring, Jim Fee, Becky Bennett
John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton, Larry Thayer, Tom
Shirley, John Valliere
OTHERS PRESENT: Russ Fortner, Pete Anderson
I. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 8, 1996 PARK BOARD MINUTES
Beth Hall MOVED TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 8, 1996 MINUTES. Jean Rydell
SECONDED THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED.
H. 1997 FEES AND CHARGES
Mr. Jenkins indicated that the fees and charges look reasonable and asked if there are any
thoughts from the staffs prospective. Mr. Keprios stated that his staff report gives a brief
review of what took place last year. He noted that the Park Board indicated that the
programs should be priced to be affordable, reasonable and accessible to the majority. An
enterprise facility should attempt to function on a self-sufficient basis. In addition, the
established philosophy has been that an enterprise fund should not be called upon to fund
other recreation programs or park developments. Also, those who receive benefits from
programs and facilities today should pay for those benefits today and not place that burden
on future taxpayers. Mr. Keprios pointed out these were the issues that were brought up
last year in regards to setting fees and charges in a public setting.
Ms. Almog asked what does enterprise facility mean and where does it come from. Mr.
Keprios explained that we have enterprise facilities that ideally are to stand on their own
financially. They take in revenue that is then used to pay for all operating expenses and
debt payments. These include the golf course, art center, arena, pool, etc. Ms. Rydell
asked if the Art Center is self-sufficient. Mr. Keprios answered that in philosophy they are
supposed to all be self-sufficient, however, we recognize that not all of them can be but
they also don't want to price themselves to where people could then not afford it. He
noted that this is not atypical of other art centers in the Twin Cities area. Ms. Almog
asked if Edinborough Park and Centennial Lakes are enterprise facilities and Mr. Keprios
replied that they both are enterprise facilities. Ms. Rydell asked if they are self-sufficient.
Mr. Keprios explained that cash flow wise eventually they will be, however, they are
currently running a cash deficit but once the Centennial Lakes development is completed
they will generate more revenue and will run on a break-even basis.
Mr. Jenkins indicated that he feels staff knows what they are doing and unless anyone has
any questions or comments he has no problem with the fees and charges.
Mr. Keprios asked Mr. Valliere if he thinks he is going to hear anything from the golfing
public with regards to the proposed increases. Mr. Valliere replied that he thinks he may
hear some. However, the residents who are patron card holders, which are the core
golfers on the course, understand and accept that we are in the market place and have a
very fair price. We are right in competition with the other public golf courses.
Mr. MacHolda pointed out that if he knew the aquatic center would open in a timely
manner he would raise the fees, however, if it does not open until mid-June or early July,
he felt it would be best not to try and raise the fees this year. Mr. MacHolda stated that
the daily admission fee and twilight fee is being raised $1.00.
Mr. Thayer noted that with the arena they are moving up and are still about the middle of
the pack. Also, all of their projections are in line with their cost estimates for the third
sheet of ice.
Mr. Keprios indicated that the Gun Range fees are going up in all categories. He also
stated that the golf dome is pretty much staying the same, however, this year there may be
a little more competition with the indoor soccer because Holy Angels has just opened a
facility in Richfield.
Jean Rydell MOVED TO APPROVE THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE
1997 FEES AND CHARGES. Beth Hall SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Keprios complimented the managers for another outstanding job again this year.
III. EDINA BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION PROPOSAL
Mr. Keprios indicated that since the last Park Board meeting he has had a chance to meet
with the Arden Park neighborhood and their overall consensus was similar to the
Wooddale group. He also noted that he talked to two people from the Kojetin Park area
and they feel very much the same. Therefore, he noted that Utley Park would be an
excellent site given the situation.
Mr. Keprios stated that the Wooddale group last month seemed to be okay with Utley
Park and indicated that he would not send out another notice. Mr. Keprios then pointed
out that a the basketball court would go immediately to the west of the tennis courts and
would run in a north/south orientation which is the proper orientation for this hemisphere.
Mr. Keprios pointed out that we would lose a very large cottonwood tree which he feels
would not be a big loss.
Mr. Keprios explained that if enough money is available he would like to build an asphalt
path around the south end of the courts which would give a clean access to the basketball
court and there would be a safe distance between the tennis court fencing and the east side
of the basketball court.
Mr. Fortner indicated that he presented this idea to the Basketball Board after the last
Park Board meeting and they have no problems with the basketball court being placed at
Utley Park.
Mr. Fortner indicated that the Basketball Association would like to offer their reserves in
the matter of capital improvements in the way of basketball. He indicated that Mr.
Keprios had mentioned there are a couple of other courts that are not being touched with
the recent referendum. Mr. Jenkins stated that is a nice gesture and the Park Board
thanked Mr. Fortner and the Basketball Association.
Beth Hall MOVED TO ADOPT THE PROPOSAL FROM THE BASKETBALL
ASSOCIATION AND THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO PLACE THE
BASKETBALL COURT IN UTLEY PARK. Jean Rydell SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
IV. ARNESON ACRES PARK WATER GARDENS PLAN
Mr. Keprios indicated there was a neighborhood development committee in which he
called people around the Arneson Acres Park neighborhood until he found enough people
willing to serve. In addition to these people there were a few representatives from the
Garden Council as well as Tim Zimmerman, who is aware of all of the issues that have
taken place for years at Arneson Acres. Also, the current and past president of the
Garden Council served on the committee. Mr. Keprios explained that he thought they had
met all of the issues of the community with regards to safety, sliding, aesthetics and would
also be within budget. Mr. Keprios noted that they have seen presentations from various
vendors on how to deal with the water amenity at the park. He explained that there has
always been a plan to do something, in fact, the City Council authorized approximately
$80,000 out of the Developer's Fund quite awhile ago to build a water amenity.
Mr. Keprios stated that he knows the neighborhood had some concerns about safety,
however, staff is not proposing to build a pond. It is simply a moving water amenity that's
artificial in nature but visually it looks like it's been there for 100 years. He pointed out
that it will look very natural and will be a beautiful addition to the arboretum landscape
park.
Mr. Keprios explained that to his surprise when construction was started some neighbors
really had an objection to the project so staff put a halt to the project. He pointed out
there will be a neighborhood meeting on November 19th so everyone can give their input.
Attending the meeting will be the architect/engineer for the project and of course staff.
Mr. Keprios will moderate the meeting.
Mr. Keprios commented that one neighbor resident summed it up when he stated that he
supposes now that he lives right next to the park he's going to have to see more bobbing
heads. Mr. Keprios indicated that he told the gentleman yes, they want to bring more
people to this beautiful park. It's a public park.
Mr. Jenkins noted that he questions having to stop the project at this juncture after all of
the research that was done, this has been in the plan for a long time. There have been
multiples of people and different groups who conversed before this was done. Mr.
Keprios indicated that he does feel these people do deserve their day in court and noted
that he feels badly he didn't have the foresight to inform them ahead of time.
Mr. Keprios indicated that he feels a member of the Park Board should attend the
meeting. It was noted there will be a Park Board member present.
V. PARK REFERENDUM UPDATE
Mr. Keprios pointed out that bids were opened for the aquatic center. He explained that
they did some value engineering, which means they negotiated with the contractor to
agree to change orders to reduce the scope of the project after the contract was signed. In
other words there were enough change orders to reduce the magnitude of the project to
make it more affordable. Mr. Keprios indicated that the low bid was $1,511,700.00 and
they value engineered an additional $108,000 out of the project. A lot of the items that
were taken out can be put back into the facility in the future when funds become available.
The City Council has approved this. Mr. Keprios indicated there was some discussion in
which two of the council members wanted to know more about the large play equipment
that was scheduled to go into the wading pool. They were wondering if there was any
way we could fund that project now. Mr. Keprios stated that he explained right now it is
an add alternate to the project which would have added an additional $140,000 to the
project which was not accepted because we simply do not have the money.
Mr. Jenkins asked the staff if they are comfortable with what has been done. Mr. Keprios
replied that is an open ended question. Mr. Jenkins indicated that he feels responsible
because the Park Board should have taken the numbers and added 20% to come up with
the bond referendum number. Mr. Keprios replied that staff originally began this process
by recommending a minimum of $6 for park improvements (not including the 3rd indoor
ice arena). Staff at that time was given the charge from the City Council that the number
5
would be $4.9 million. After numerous meetings throughout the community, the number
ended up being $5.5 million because the City Council felt that number would sell to the
community.
Mr. Jenkins asked what does it look like we will be dropping from the list. Mr. Keprios
answered that he will have a list distributed because he would like the Park Board's input.
However, it's basically new amenities which have never existed before that should be
dropped such as picnic shelters, batting cages, etc.
Mr. Keprios indicated that everything else is going okay.
VI. OTHER
A. Countryside Plavground Equipment - Mr. Keprios explained to the Park Board
that staff would like their input on some playground equipment that they are looking at
possibly putting in at Countryside Park.
Mr. MacHolda informed the Park Board that in the middle of October two neighborhood
parks, Strachauer and Countryside, were bid for playground equipment. He indicated that
Strachauer Park does have a neighborhood committee which consists of six people,
however, no one has stepped forward to be on the Countryside Park neighborhood
committee. The Strachauer Park committee has gone with more traditional play
equipment, something similar to what is at Wooddale Park. Mr. MacHolda also pointed
out that a lot of people have indicated that they would like see the equipment that is
currently at Lewis Park to be in their neighborhood park. Lewis Park has the traditional
playground equipment with the soft green and tan colors.
Mr. MacHolda pointed out that right down the street from Countryside Park is
Countryside School where the school has just put in some traditional playground
equipment. Mr. MacHolda explained that some neighborhoods have gone with creative
play equipment, which he showed a model to the Park Board. He explained creative play
equipment is where kids can visualize being in a castle and interact a little differently than
with the traditional play equipment. He noted there would still be areas where they can
climb, slide, swing and have spring riders. Mr. MacHolda indicated that they have not
gone forward with this to the City Council because they would like to first hear from a
neighborhood group.
Mr. MacHolda asked Mr. Anderson, who is on the Strachauer Park committee, if he
would like to comment. Mr. Anderson indicated that the creative play equipment was a
design the Strachauer Park committee looked at. However, it does not offer the large
muscle activity type of thing that they were looking for in a park. He noted that it doesn't
really give the kids a chance to stretch their muscles and get plenty of physical activity.
Mr. Anderson stated that he feels in some sense it's limited to what it can do. Mr.
Anderson did point out though that Countryside School park, which is more of a
6
traditional park, is just down the street where Strachauer Park does not have another park
close by.
Mr. MacHolda asked if anyone felt the colors were too bold. Mr. Anderson replied that
up until a couple of years ago the parks were bold colors and he doesn't think anyone
complained about them. He also pointed out that they are probably more inviting to the
children.
Mr. Jenkins asked Mr. MacHolda what he sees other communities doing with their
playground equipment. Mr. MacHolda answered that they are doing a combination of the
playground equipment. Mr. Jenkins noted that seems to make the most sense to him to
have a combination for the older kids and younger kids.
Ms. Almog indicated that she has a 1 1/2 year-old and noted that a lot of the parks really
do not offer a lot for the younger children and it would be good to target something for
the zero to 5 year-old rather then the 6 to 12 year-old.
Mr. MacHolda indicated their thought was not to repeat something that was already two
blocks away. Mr. Keprios noted that like Mr. MacHolda mentioned we don't want to
duplicate what's already there and we want to offer something that's more suitable for the
younger kids because we don't do much for that age group in our park system.
Mr. Keprios indicated that he's not asking for a motion he is just looking for some
comments. Mr. Jenkins replied that he doesn't think there are any negative comments it's
a matter if staff thinks it will work. Mr. Keprios asked the Park Board how they would
feel if they went forward and put the playground equipment in and see what happens. Mr.
Jenkins stated that staff should go ahead and put it in.
Mr. Anderson pointed out that the bid for Strachauer Park came in somewhat under what
had been mentioned. He asked staff about the possibility of putting asphalt underneath the
hockey boards with the money that was "saved" with the playground equipment. Mr.
Keprios replied that he is getting similar questions from other neighborhoods and the
answer is that it's not a staffs decision but rather part of the process that you are going to
see down the road. Just because we have a certain number of dollars budgeted for a
particular park doesn't mean that they get to spend every nickel for whatever they want. If
this happened every park would come up with a wish list that wouldn't quit which is great
and we should keep working towards a wish list. However, we are going to ask the Park
Board to prioritize all of these things because ultimately it's up to the Park Board and City
Council to prioritize what's going to get done first, second, third, etc.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Rydell MOVED TO ADJOURNED THE MEETING AT 8:20 P.M. Beth Hall
SECONDED THE MOTION. Meeting adjourned.