Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 23, 1992 o o o CA o o CITY of ANDOVER 7:30 P.M. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. Joint Meeting Park and Recreation Commission and City Council July 23, 1992 Call to Order Residents Forum Approval of Minutes Kelsey-Round Lake Park Update and Discussion Ordinance 10, Section 9.07 Park Dedication Requirements Development of City Hall Complex Fee for Use of Sports Fields Substandard Park Facilities Adopt - A - Park Program Need for a Park Coordinator Communications Between Commission/City Council Chairman's Report Adjournment *Note: The Park and Recreation Commission is to meet at 6:45 PM at Hidden C~eek East Park. Q o o o o o ~ CITY of ANDOVER PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING - JULY 23. 1992 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Park and Recreation Commission was called to order by Chairperson Jeff Kieffer on July 23, 1992. 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Commissioners absent: Also present: Tom Anderson, Jim Lindahl, David Woods Mike Auger, Darrell DeLarco, Roger Paulson City Councilmembers: Mayor Orttel, Jacobson, McKelvey and Perry Assistant City Engineer, Todd Haas Public Works Superintendent, Frank Stone Public Works, Kevin Starr Others RESIDENT FORUM Dave O'Toole. Andover Athletic Association - thanked the Park Board and Public Works for the good work on the ballflelds. They have had nothing but good remarks about the condition of the fields. However, they would like to see additional fields across the street In the near future! APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 9, 1992: Correct as written. MOTION by Lindahl, Seconded by Anderson, to approve the July 9 Minutes as written. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 3-Absent (Auger, DeLarco, Pauslon) vote. JOINT MEETING WITH THE ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL KELSEY-ROUND LAKE PARK UPDATE AND DISCUSSION Mr. Haas reported the updated site plan for the Kelsey-Round Lake park has been approved by both the Park and Recreation Commission and the City Council. The environmental worksheet statement which needs to be submitted as a part of the application is almost completed. They are also finishing up on Phase 1 of the survey required by the Minnesota Historical Society. Once that is submitted, they will meet to determine how the funding will be submitted to the City when the project is under way. Mr. Haas hoped to get started with some of the grading in September or October. (- ) u '\ / Andover Park and Recreation Commission Meeting (Jointly with Council) Minutes ~ July 23, 1992 Page 2 (Kelsey-Round Lake Park Update and Discussion, Continued) Mayor Orttel stated the Council has committed the funding for this project for the first year. Further financial commitments wil I be made at the time of budgeting in future years. Any questions regarding the actual construction should first be directed to the Staff . Chairperson Kieffer stated a concern has been raised regarding the type of trails, as walkers/hikers do not mix with bikes, skateboards, and roller blades. It was felt the latter activities would have an adverse effect on the wildlife. Council felt the intent was to have walking trails. They suggested the trails be posted as such; and if there are problems, deal with them at that time. Chairperson Kieffer then read a letter he had written to the Council dated July 23, 1992, correcting and clarifying some of the misinformation stated at the May 5 public hearing on this poJect. '\ ORDINANCE 10. SECTION 9.07 - PARK DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS , ) Chairperson Kieffer explained the City has been using the same appraiser for all appraisals done to determine land value for park dedication purposes. He asked whether they should continue doing so or does the Council prefer that the appraisers be picked on a rotating basis. Council generally felt that as long as the Park Commission is satisfied with the appraisals, it is perfectly acceptable to hire the same appraiser for all the appraisals to be done. If, however, the Commission feels it is a unique piece of land which should be appraised by a different firm or that they wish to have a second appraisal done on the same parcel for comparison purposes, the Council suggested they do so. DEVELOPMENT OF CITY HALL COMPLEX '\ '\ / Chairperson Kieffer explained the Commission would like to know the Council's intentions for development for the City-owned property across from City Hall, as there has been an increasing need for additional sports fields. The Andover Athletic Association has Indicated an Interest In doing some fundralslng for another sports complex, and there Is also a possibility that other private groups or businesses would be willing to help financially as well. Council stated nothing as a sports complex in been the Intended use. official has been decided, though It is shown the Comprehensive Plan and that has generally The City Administrator has suggested the land ~ / o , / Andover Park and Recreation Commission Meeting (Jointly with Council) MInutes - July 23, 1992 Page 3 (Development of City Hall Complex, Continued) is too valuable for a sports compiex and that it may be to the City's benefit to sell it for residential development and use the money to buy additional land north of the CIty Hali for an expansion to the exIsting sports complex, but there has been no Council decision on that suggestion. Council suggested the Park Commission may wish to research that further. Mayor Orttel stated that if the City has volunteers and associations willing to help with another sports complex, the Park Commission should begin working on it immediately. Councilmember Jacobson suggested an overall plan be done with consideration also given to whether or not a municipal pool will ever been needed. Mr. Stone also stated the orIginal intent was the property behind the Public Works Building was to be used by Public Works. He hoped a plan would move that soccer field elsewhere so they could have that storage area. The Council also noted another concern of having the two sports complexes on either side of CoRd 18, which Is a busy road, suggesting consideration be given to either a a pedlstrlan bridge over the road or a walking tunnel under It. , J Mr. O'Toole - stated people are Interested In fundraIsIng, but they do not have a goal. He asked If It Is possible to get an estimate of the costs. Also, one of the bIggest complaints Is that there are no bathroom facilItIes at this complex, thinking It can be an advantage to have sewer available to the sports complexes. Mayor Orttel felt the Staff could provIde a rough plan and cost estImate, some goal to work for. He also explained sewer avaIlability Is not a problem. FEE FOR USE OF SPORTS FIELDS Chairperson Kieffer explained the Commission has talked about requiring a fee for the use of the sports fields, which would generate income to develop other fields and for maintenance. Commisioner Auger had surveyed the other cities, but that report is not available this evening. He did find that the cities do not charge a fee to the youth sports organizations. The concern is with some of the leagues that regularly want to use the fields. Mayor Orttel stated the CIty has generally not charged non-profit leagues, but he had no problem with the Commission Investigating the Issue further and coming back with the survey and a recommendation. There was a brief discussion on the Idea of charging non-resIdents a fee. Mayor Orttel stated that prior to the establishment of the ,/ Andover Athletic AssociatIon, Andover youth and residents belonged to leagues from other cities. He felt that reciprocity is a good thing to keep in place. . '\ U u \ Andover Park and Recreation Commission Meeting (Jointly with Council) ~~ Minutes - July 23, 1992 Page 4 (Fee for Use of Sports Fields, Continued) Mr. O'Toole also reported that a group has raised a considerable amount of money for a sports complex in Anoka; however, there is no land available in Anoka. He asked if the City would be willing to work with other cities. Mayor Orttel felt It may be beneficial for all if the cities work together to more effectively use funds and facilities. SUBSTANDARD PARK FACILITIES Mr. Starr reported he found that about 12 of the City parks are not In compliance with minimum safety standards. About 12 of the parks that have been developed In recent years do meet the standards. He estimated it will cost $8,500 to bring the substandard parks into compliance In some of the parks, the equipment should be moved to put it all in one area. Mr. Stone suggested that the work be scheduled to be done over a period of time. Another thing they must start doing is keeping inspection records on park equipment. ~. ) Council felt this work should be done as quickly as possible, that it should be given priority. Discussion was on funding. Chairperson Kieffer stated the dedication fund has grown over the past several months, and they will be deciding on how that money should be spent. Mr. Haas argued that when people buy homes in a particular development, they are actually paying the park dedication fees that were given by that particular developer; and they expect that those funds will be spent to develop the park in their development. He suggested the Commission think about spending those park dedication funds in the developments from which they originated. Mr. Stone stated about $80,000 per year is spent from the park bUdget for labor; and as the number of parks increase, so does the amount of labor required. He cautioned that care should be taken when accepting park land to be sure it is really needed. Chairperson Kieffer stated they have been accepting more cash in lieu of land this year; that is why the park dedication fund has increased so much. Mayor Orttel suggested a program be considered to build out a park in a development as the area is being built. It may eliminate some resident complaints as well as use specific funds in the specific development. ~) Council again expressed the opinion that the safety in the parks should be the first priority. with the work to be done as soon as possIble. " \...~ u . \ Andover Park and Recreation Commission Meeting (Jointly with Council) ,,) Minutes - July 23, 1992 Page 5 NEED FOR A PARK COORDINATOR Chairperson Kieffer pointed out the difficulty of keeping track of how much cash was receIved for each development and the complexity of scheduling sports fields and other activitIes. A coordInator could also look at long-range goals, priorItIze projects. desIgn the development of parks, and oversee the development of another sports complex if that Is approved. The CommIssion feels there Is a need to coordInate these actIvitIes with an in-house Staff person. though for now a full-tIme posItion could not be JustifIed. Mr. Stone thought that thIs posItion could be a part of the responsIbilitIes of another posItion which is needed around CIty Hall. CouncIl suggested they speak wIth the Finance DIrector regarding the amount of park dedIcation received from each development. They also suggested that a Job descrIptIon be developed for a park coordinator for theIr consIderatIon. IncludIng what percent of that person's tIme would be for parks and JustIfIcation for the posItIon. ADOPT-A-PARK PROGRAM ~~ ChaIrperson Kieffer asked the CouncIl's positIon on a proposal to institute an Adopt-A-Park program for Andover. Several indivIduals and/or organIzations have already "adopted" parks. though nothing formal has been established by the CIty. The CouncIl felt the program Is an excellent one. and that as volunteers there is no problem wIth liabIlity. They were also in favor of sIgnage IndIcating who has adopted a specIfIc park. Mr. Starr stated he has Just received information on the program from the League of CItIes. whIch he wil I forward to the Park CommIssion. COMMUNICATION BETWEEN COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL ChaIrperson Kieffer suggested the lines of communication be kept open between the Park CommissIon and the CouncIlmembers and asked that they be contacted whenever the Council has a questIon. Council agreed. HIDDEN CREEK EAST PARK DEVELOPMENT , '\ '- ..../ Chairperson KIeffer reported the Park CommissIon met on site of the Hidden Creek East park prIor to this evenIng's meetIng. Several resIdents met them and were very opposed to the CommIssIon's plans to develop a parkIng lot. The CommIssIon had planned to develop a soccer field and play area in that park. The resIdents do want a play area and a wading pool. A soccer fIeld would be acceptable, but not for use by anyone other than their neIghborhood. Most of the neIghborhood consIsts of smaller children. and they do not want others using theIr park. Mayor Orttel stated he receIved several phone calls from residents In that area expressIng those same feelIngs. " "J ,J Andover Park and Recreation Commission Meeting (Jointly with Council) . ~ Minutes - July 23, 1992 Page 6 (Hidden Creek East Park Development, Continued) Discussion continued on the philosophy of park development and the need for more playing fields in the City. Merlvn Prochniak - felt that the parks belong to the entire community; however, the additional fields belong in a center complex, not in neighborhood parks. Council generally agreed that it should be the goal to develop the sports fields in a center complex as was discussed earlier tonight. A suggestion for the Hidden Creek East park may be to develop a play area in a portion of the park at this time to accommodate the smaller children, and to plan for additional development in the future to accommodate older children, which might include a small bal I field, basketball court, etc. Mayor Orttel did not favor a parking lot for what appears to be a neighborhood park. He suggested the Park Commission determine if others from the development will have to drive to the park. Commissioner Perry preferred to see a trail system for bikers and walkers rather than a parking lot in a neighborhood park. '\ / CHAIRMAN'S REPORT Councilmember Perry commended the Andover Athletic Association plus other groups for the tremendous amount of work and support given to the youth and to the City. She was impressed with the spirit of the City, thanking all the people that have given their time. Merlvn Prochniak - asked about the budget for parks. The Commissioners and Staff reviewed the General Budget, the amount for capital improvements, the $40,000 earmarked for Kelsey-Round Lake Park development, and the number of employees working in parks. It was also suggested that the Park Commission may want to look at establishing criteria regarding the needs and location of large parks, and then examine each development as it comes in as to what type of park is needed based on that criteria. Chairperson KIeffer learned of a promotIon on Halloween candy bags on whIch some reference could be made to supporting the parks, keeping the parks clean, or something on safety. Council noted the success of the Lions Halloween party done every year In the City and suggested they may be willing to work with the City on this effort. As president of the Lions Club, CouncIlmember McKelvey agreed to put It on their meet i ng agenda. MOTION by Anderson, Seconded by Woods, to adjourn. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 3-Absent (Auger, DeLarco, Paulson) vote. The meetIng was ~ adjourned at 9:15 p.m. \ // Respectfull~ubm...it.ted, L - ,.~ ~ ,.~ t~_h.dlt~ C~-~. . ~ elL Mar Ila A. peach~eCOrding Secretary o o o . \ o u July 23, 1992 Mayor Ken Orttel City Council Members REFERENCE: Public Hearing May 5, 1992 Dear Mayor: At the Public hearing for Kelsey Park held on May 5 1991 Mr. Windschitl presented information conce~nlng the reasons why the Park and Recreation Commission cited a parking lot to be at l5lst street. Many of his statements were incorrect and intentionally misleading. The purpose of the letter is to clarify that information and to explain the position of the Park Commission. First, we stated that fewer residents would be affected at l5lst than on l49th. Mr. Windschitl asked if those residents have the same rights as the others have? Yes, all residents have equal rights. Our decision was solely based on the number of residents being affected by traffic flow to the lot in which l5lst affected less than half as many if the lot would be off of l49th. Second, Mr. Windschitl argued that the original documents showed the parking lot at the end of l49th; so clearly those people should have known. Also, there will be direct access from Seventh Avenue along l49th when the last piece of the street is built. We have never seen this 'original document' and that document was probably drawn up for the type of access that was available at that time. Multiple changes with accesses to the Park and Park design has occurred since then. Direct access from Seventh Avenue to l49th does not exist today, we do not know when or if this access will take place. Access to Seventh Avenue to l5lst does exist today providing a direct access to the park. Third, that there was less objection at l5lst at the public hearing, Mr. Windschitl stated those residents on l5lst were not aware that a hearing would be taking place. Normal procedures were followed by the City for Public Hearing notices. We are not involved in distribution of notices for public hearings. Fourth, that the parking lot locations are equal distance to the proposed bridge to the island, he stated on a map that l5lst is considerably farther than l49th. We had asked the Park Design Developer Bill Sanders to measure from the map of the Park the distance from the proposed bridge to both parking lot sites. l5lst parking lot site is roughly 1,000 feet to the proposed () () July 23, 1992 Page o bridge where 149th is 1,200 feet. This is what we stated as being 'ABOUT EQUAL DISTANCE I. We the Park and Recreation commission understand that this is now 'Water Under the Bridge' but we felt that it was important to clarify the incorrect information that Mr. Windschitl gave as a rebuttal to the reasons why the Park and Recreation Commission cited 151st over 149th for a proposed parking lot site if one was being required. Sincerely, " Jeff Kieffer Parks Commissioner Parks and Recreation Commission u C)