Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-03-26 PRC Packet . . . r illwater "~ - - ~ ~ - ~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA J STILLWATER PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD MEETING NOTICE MARCH 26, 2001 The Stillwater Parks and Recreation Board will meet on Monday, March 26, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. at Stillwater City Hall in the Council Chambers Conference Room 213,216 N. 4th Street. AGENDA 1. Approval of February 26, 2001 Minutes. 2. Staples Park Survey Review. 3. Pioneer Park! Aiple Brush Cutting. 4. Long Range Park Plan. s. Brown's Creek Clean-up Day, April 21 st - 9:00 a.m. - noon. 6. Other items. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 . . . Stillwater Parks and Recreation Board Meeting February 26,2001 Present: David Junker, Wally Milbrandt, Linda Amrein, Dawn Flinn, Sandy Snellman, Rob McGarry, Mike Polehna Staff Present: Sue Fizgerald, City Planner, Steve Russell, Community Development Director, and Police Chief Larry Dauffenbach Absent: None Call to Order: Vice Chair Mike Polehna called the meeting to Order at 7: 15 p.m. Introduction of New Member: New Member Sandy Snellman was introduced as the newest member of the Stillwater Parks and Recreation Board. All members present introduced themselves. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair: A motion was made by Ms. Snellman to nominate Mr. Polehna as Chairperson. Mr. Milbrandt seconded the motion. Hearing no other nominations, a vote was taken. All were in favor by vote. A motion was made by Mr. Milbrant to nominate Ms. Amrein to Vice Chair. Mr. Junker seconded the nomination. Hearing no other nominations, a vote was taken. All members were in favor. Approval ofthe Minutes of December 1 L 2000: A motion was made by Mr. Milbrant to accept the minutes ofthe meeting for December 11,2000. Mr. Junker seconded the motion. Hearing no comment, a vote was taken. All were in favor of accepting the minutes. Lowell Park Plan Implementation: Mr. Russell explained that six years ago the city had applied for $250,000 from the state to assist with the plan implementation. A map of the Recreation Site Plan of Lowell Park at Mulberry Point was presented as prepared by Sanders Wacker, Bergly, Inc. The Site Plan Map included: playground-young children, perennial garden, playground-older children, restroom-future phase, picnicking, gazebo, or park feature/memorial-future phase and an overlook~ Mr. Russell explained that the City has $180,000 in the Capital Improvements Program for 2001. Mr. Russell also explained that the city has expressed a strong desire to have a restroom constructed in Lowell Park as shown in the plan. The cost of a constructed restroom is around $150,000. Mr. Junker said that the sewer is already in place at that location and should reduce the cost. Mr. Russell thought that to move events to the north of the Chestnut area would be advantageous to ease the parking problems. DISCUSSION: Mr. Milbrant said that he did not think that playground equipment would be correct as he thought it would be shortchanging our events planning. Mr. Polehna did not believe that playground equipment would be appropriate. Mr. Russell said that there are sitting sculptures that could be sat on by the children that may be appropriate and considered playground equipment. Mr. Junker questioned if Mulberry Point would have an open-faced gazebo and how close it was in proximity to the neighboring business and if that would be a problem. 1 . . . Parks and Recreation Meeting February 26, 2001 Discussion followed regarding the restrooms and placement of the restrooms. It was suggested that there would be two restrooms: One by the Dock Restaurant with multiple stalls and a visitors center connection. Mr. Polehna suggested that all the materials be the same in all the restroom designS and that there should be high quality for the restrooms. Mr. McGarry believed that the restroom should be constructed the best possible way or right way. Mr. Polehna said that he would volunteer in as a technical advisory and Mr. Milbrant also offered to be on a subcommittee to study the restroom construction. The question of maintenance came up as to who would maintain the restroom and keep them clean and what the cost would be. There was much discussion regarding the types oflawn grass and how the grass would hold up. The issue of flooding and the issue of a lot of use were discussed. It was determined that there is a special kind of grass that can be used that holds up better than other grasses. Applying the new grasses was discussed as the north or south end could be closed for reseeding. The north end has not been fully developed. The question of irrigation of grass was mentioned. The proposal of a three-foot floodwall was discussed as it is in the plans. The issue of lighting was questioned in regard to plans for park lighting. REVIEW OF LOWELL PARK USE POLICY. There were a number of issues surrounding the use of Lowell Park to be presented: Number and duration of events, cost to the City (police, public works, parks), availability of park to local residents when special events underway, public vs. private for profit use, security concerns, alcohol use, public facilities provided (restroom), city subsidy to use of park, private security provided, impact of use on downtown businesses and reduced parking, impact on physical park conditions (grass, restroom), existing activities, Lumberjack Days, Taste of Stillwater, Art fairs and boater access to park. Mr. Russell explained that the city staff felt that the uses within the parks and the types of uses in the park should have a use policy so that the city can respond to the policy rather than have policies set for each event as it happens. Mr. Polehna suggested that other cities that have policies in place should be contacted to see how they have set policies for events within their cities. The perspective of the local businesses and the visitors was discussed. A Memorandum was presented from Tim Thomsen, the Public Works Superintendent GUIDELINES FOR USE OF STILL WATER PARKS BY THE STILLWATER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. The Chamber of Commerce believes that they must remain at their current activity level. The Chamber also believes that these current events must not be allowed to escalate to a higher impact level number and that a rest period in between events is necessary. The impact levels, which explain, rest periods and the level criteria (number of vendors, people, length of time of event and use of space) were discussed. There are eight events scheduled for this year. Mr. Russell explained that the city losses are $12,000 in loss parking revenues for these events. Mr. Polehna said that the City of Winona has a commercial use fee permit and he said that he would check on this. Mr. Russell said that the Parks Board should have something like a "Vision for Park" to be presented to the public. POLICE DEPARTMENT CONCERNS FOR THE PARK. Police Chief Dauffenbach presented some concerns for the public events held in the park. There were concerns for park safety regarding lighting. Some lighting should be left on. Although there is an Ordinance for no alcohol in the parks, on event days there are. Police chief suggested that a "beer garden" be used ifthe city moves to the north end as the less the alcohol consumption the less the problems are. 2 Parks and Recreation Board February 26,2001 . Another problem is the people crossing the street at Chestnut Street. Police Chief Dauffenbach said that there are always slips and falls, accidents and speeding and bike control. A lot of problems are alcohol and alcohol related and every weekend is busy. There is a lot of overtime on the weekends and events. Update Staples Field Ouestionnaire. The results of the Staples Park Survey were made available to the Board. At question is the basketball court that has been at its current site for 25 years. There had been a signed complaint that the noise from the court was causing problems and some problems with manners at the court by some individuals who used the courts. The court had been updated just two years ago. Ms. Snellman said that the survey did not tell the Board members very much in regard to complaints. Mr. Polehna said that action does need to be taken because the houses sit too close to the court. Mr. Junker said that it would be placed on the city councils agenda. Removing the court was one option that was discussed. . Amundson Subdivision Park Dedication. The property in question is behind a row oflots on Amundson Drive known as Outlot B. To the north is West St. Croix Avenue accessible by Street C and B and A located in Oak Glen. Mr. Dave Neuman was present to explain the park. This is a 21-lot subdivision of townhouses (individual) and they have a homeowners association. These are all detached townhomes on small lots. Price range is from $325,000 to a million dollars plus. The park is adjacent to Stonebridge School and there is a pond that the school uses for school projects. Mr. Neuman said that an Wisconsin ecological firm is trying to do a new way of treating storm water completely above ground and that they have a grant to monitor what we are doing. Mr. Neuman said that it is a project ofleast impact Mr. Junker said he would like to see some shrubs and the question of public access was questioned. The question of moving some lots a little to provide better access was discussed to better define the public trail or parkway. The park was defined as a visual part of this neighborhood. The issue will go before the planning commission in March. With better access for the public parkway, a motion was made to approve the park dedication. MOTION: A motion was made by Dawn Flinn to accept the proposal with improved public access and seconded by Mr. Junker. All were in favor of approval. Aiple Property Park Plan Update. The adopted Aiple Property Park Plan has been reviewed and revised based on the latest bridge location. Mr. Junker questioned if any grant money was available to improve the park by adding security and lighting. It is thought to be a two million-dollar project to do demolition of the existing structure and finish the vision for the park. A suggestion from Mr. Russell was to form a committee to generate funding for the project. A tourism tax was suggested. Mr. Russell said that the city did purchase the Union Pacific Railroad right of way from Nelson Street to Sunnyside Marina and that there was a capital improvement plan in place. MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Junker to approve the updated plans for the Aiple property Mr. McGarry seconded the motion. All were in favor of approval. . CDBG Park Grant Request. The city has applied for $50,000 of funds for construction of playground equipment at the old athletic field and $43,000 for construction of park improvements to Staples Field. The money will be available July 2001. This is a community Development Block Grant 3 . . . Parks and Recreation Board February 26, 2001 Other items: Mr. Milbrandt mentioned the potential of a volleyball court complex. Mr. Milbrandt also mentioned restriction form use of any snowmobiles on Myrtle Street. Mr. Polehna said that the city council would have to give approval for any ban of snowmobiles on Myrtle Street. Adjournment: Mr. Polehna adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully Submitted Diane Martinek Recording Secretary 4 . . . City of Stillwater Parks Commission City Council Chambers March 26, 2001 Members Present: Michael Polehna (Chairperson), Robert McGarry, Linda Amrein (Vice- Chair), Sandy Snellman, Wally Milbrandt (City Council Representative) Absent: David G. Junker, Dawn Flinn Others Present: Steve Russell, Community Development Director and Klayton Eckles, City Engineer/Public Works Director Mike Polehna called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Approval of Minutes: Linda Amrein, seconded by Rob McGarry, moved approval ofthe February 26, 2001 minutes as presented; motion passed unanimously. Linda Amrein later pointed out some clerical errors in the minutes that will be corrected. Staples Park Survey Review Steve Russell presented the Staples Park survey results to members and to Burton Dvergsda1 and George Thompson residents of the Staples Park neighborhood. George Thompson stated that the survey did not explain the problems that are occurring at the park, specifically the basketball court. Mr. Milbrandt explained that the survey was intentionally designed to be non-prejudicial. The neighborhood residents reiterated the problems as listed in Exhibit A of the survey. Different solutions to the problems were discussed, including a suggestion by Mike Polehna to turn the basketball court into a tennis court, take the baskets down and leave the hard surface for rollerbladers and children on tricycles, tearing down the baskets and reinstalling them at another location (this, the commission members agreed, would only move the same problem to a new location). The isolation of this park was cited as the main reason for all of the problems. Rob McGarry stated that his children frequented the park and had not encountered any problems with "bad elements". He wanted to know if the residents are simply having trouble with noise and not necessarily outsiders. Ms. Snellman suggested restricting the parking near the park which would deter the "outsiders" from driving to the park and abusing the facilities. The residents indicated a willingness to help turn this area back to parkland with flowers, benches a gazebo, etc. Steve Russell suggested moving the basketball courts to the recreation center. The general concensus was that the park was fine but the location was terrible. Mr. Milbrandt stated that there is no real solution to this problem and recommended closing the basketball portion of the park before the season arrives. . . . A motion was made by Linda Amrein and seconded by Sandy Snellman (with reservations) to recommend to council to disable and lock up Staple's basketball courts and direct staff to find other uses for this property and another location for the basketball court. V ote in favor; Mike Polehna, Linda Amrein, Sandy, Snellman, Wally Milbrandt, opposed - Rob McGarry. Motion passed 4 to 1. Pioneer Park! Aiple Property Brush Cutting Steve Russell discussed that at their last meeting, city council members received a revised Aiple Property Park plan. They then requested that some preliminary work, i.e. brush cutting/clearing be done at the Aiple property to at least allow for early use/access. This suggestion was made by Terry Zoller & John Rheinberger. It was then recommended that the City Council refer this matter to the Parks Board. Mr. Russell asked if the Parks Board members want to do a thorough, quality job or some "quick & dirty" things just to get started. The response (at least regarding Lowell Park) was let's do it well. Ms. Snellman had questions regarding safety and liability issues considering the present condition of the Aiple property. At this point there are no capital improvement funds/budget to make any substantial improvements. Klayton Eckles suggested that if we wanted to do anything of substance to this park that it should be part of the capital improvement program; worked into the budget and dealt with as a project. Mike Polehna questioned why they could not just "clean" it up for now, meaning clearing brush and cutting the "scrub" trees before they get more than 6" in diameter (the point at which they could no longer be cut down according to the Wild & Scenic River Act). Using the "Sentence to Serve"or the Twin Cities Tree Trust groups to do the clearing/clean-up was discussed. The possibility of corporate funding or matching grants being obtained was also discussed. Mr. Russell also stated that Congressman Luther was seeking funds that could be applied to clean up of the Terra building and surrounding area. Ms. Snellman asked if she was correct in thinking that funding for the park is tied in to the new bridge. Mr. Russell stated that some funding should come in at different stages of bridge completion. Wally Milbrandt stated that this was a clean-up issue not an improvement issue. He also recommended that this issue get directed to Klayton Eckles and Tim Thomsen for funding and work orders. Linda Amrein expressed concerns regarding brush cutting at Pioneer Park and asked that care be taken to realize the impact this clearing might have on the properties below Pioneer Park. Wally Milbrandt moved to direct Klayton Eckles to secure funding for minimal brush cutting/clean up at both Pioneer Park and the Aiple property. This motion was seconded by Sandy Snellman. Vote all in favor. . . . Long Range Park Plan Steve Russell reported on earlier meetings, both City Council and Planning meetings that involved Parks issues. Mike Polehna presented copies of the Washington County Parks Use Policy and a copy of the City ofSt. Paul's Parks & Recreation use policy. Klayton commented on the Public Works issues involved with Lowell Park and its use/abuse during big event weekends. He spoke of the difficulties of developing and maintaining the park and wanted the commission members to be aware of the significant amount oftime & energy that is involved for public works. He asked at what point do we want to draw the line regarding events in our parks, the frequency of the events and the way our facilities are used and abused. To this point, Mr. Eckles felt that the city essentially gives the parks to the users and accepts it back in whatever shape it is in. Perhaps a bigger damage deposit or greater deterrent to damaging the city's property is in order. When questioned by Ms. Amrein regarding the amount of damage deposits, Mr. Eckles stated that perhaps a $5,000.00 amount would be a greater incentive for groups to better oversee the use/abuse of the parks and take more care in cleaning up after themselves. Commission member McGarry suggested that the scheduling of each event be contingent on the condition of the park after the previous year's event - let the big event users know that nothing is automatic. All were in agreement that there is a lot being done in a very limited area. Mr. Milbrandt stated that the most important thing to be done for our parks, at this time, is to make a plan (similar to the Comprehensive Trail Plan), prioritize the items, and decide where & when time, energy and money should be concentrated. Don't just create parks and expect that they will maintain themselves. Steve Russell stated that funding sources are critical and that it is important that the parks commission get their projects prioritized as previously stated by Mr. Milbrandt. It is time to gather all that has been done on park plans, comprehensive plans, etc. and make a presentation to the City Council at a 4:30 p.m. special meeting. Wally Milbrandt stated "get this on their radar screens". Steve Russell will get this on next month's agendas. Brown's Creek Clean-Up Day. April 21 5t 9:00 a.m. - Noon Klayton Eckles explained that clearing the invasive trees and shrubs from Brown's Creek will be the main goal of the clean up day scheduled for 4/21/01. Linda Amrein asked if it was common practice to hold school cross country events on city property. She was told that yes it is. Mike Polehna reiterated his offer of some redwood platforms to be used in some areas of Brown's Creek Nature Preserve. Steve Russell asked the board to consider posting the trails in the Nature Preserve area as "No Bicycles". He recommended that if this is the intention then it should be accomplished before the trails dry out. . . . Wally Milbrandt moved that no off-road bicycles be allowed on the disc golf or the nature preserve areas for the 2001 season and until the matter can be thoroughly researched. Linda Amrein seconded the motion. Vote all in favor. Other items: Klayton Eckles had a request from his neighborhood to install and maintain bluebird houses in the public park area at Creekside Crossing. No one could see a problem with this. Steve Russell will check into putting a request for a volleyball court at Northland Court on the next agenda. Wally Milbrandt called for a motion to adjourn at 9:00 p.m. Motion made by Wally Milbrandt and seconded by Rob McGarry. Vote: all in favor. Respectfully submitted, Kathy Rogness Recording Secretary , ~il~te~ '" "l:'"''' f S OF .""" ~') ity 0 tillwater Staples Park Neighborhood Survey . The City of Stillwater is committed to providing excellent recreation facilities for your use. Stillwater Parks and Recreation Commission would like your assistance and input in their planning efforts for the Staples Park Complex. To help us understand which outdoor activities are the most important to the community, we are asking you to complete the enclosed survey. Please return the completed survey to City Hall by January 31, 2001. If you have questions or concerns, please call Sue Fitzgerald at 651-430-8822, or contact any member of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Thank you for your assistance. STAPLES PARK SURVEY 1. Are you or any member of your family current users of Staples Park? Yes 55 No 23 If yes, which areas: Tennis Courts 29 Basketball Court 22 Playground Equipment 43 Ballfields 27 Ice Rink 44 .. How many people live in your household? 29 0 - 4 years old 20 5 - 9 years old 32 10 - 15 years old 93 16 - 49 years old LOver 50 years old 3. Have you experienced any problems when using the Park? Yes 25 No 48 . (see exhi bi t A) If yes, would you please elaborate 4. What, if any, additional enhancements or deletions would like to see made to Staples Park? Examples: Picnic Facilities Places to sit Volleyball Other ~ 51 ~ . (OVER) CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATERl MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 . City of Stillwater Staples Park Neighborhood Survey, continued 5 . Would you favor closing the streets mnning through the Park? Yes 33 No 35 6. How satisfied are you with the Park? Very Satisfied 9 Satisfied 35 Neutral25 Dissatisfied 6 Very Dissatisfied 3 7. Overall, how satisfied are you with the Park? Very Satisfied 14 Satisfied 28 Neutral26 Dissatisfied 4 Very Dissatisfied 3 8. How safe do you feel when you visit the Park? Very Satisfied 21 Satisfied 36 N eutral13 Dissatisfied 2 Very Dissatisfied 1 9. How would you rate the Parks condition and maintenance? . Excellent 8 Good 39 Fair 25 Poor 5 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE . CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER? MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 Exhi bit A Staples Park Survey #3 Problems . Older boys/language 8 Courts locked 8 No bathrooms 2 No warming house 4 No skating lights 1 Dog messes 1 Need a better ballfield 1 Loud noises at night 1 Crowed ice irnk 1 More benches 1 Limited play equipment 1 Stray dogs 1 Fast driving 1 Enhancements Skateboarding 1 Bathrooms 2 Open basketball 1 Gardens 4 Outdoor pool 1 Fence around ballfield 3 More play equipment 6 . Volleyball 8 More trees 3 Warming house 5 Shelter 1 Hockey boards 2 . . . . ....~ .:"~ ~~.~ ~1 The purpose of this petition is to p~rmanently remove the basketball court on the corner of Martha and Aspen Streets in the City of Stillwater. Our neighborhood is being subjected to the following conditions: · Loud noise and profa~!y at all hours of the day · Personal threat~9 life and property · Property damage in tli~~:form of broken windows . Trespass that inoll1des exposure and urination · Alcohol consumption b~Rgpth adults and minors We have worked with the park~_ommission, the City Council, and most recently, the Stillwater Police Department to solve these problems but they have grown inc'reasingly worse. It is time to remove the basketball court and return quiet and safety to the neighborhood. Name Address -,", :s I . . . -- .,,-.JJ ) )7 '(lIT ~- Lf L t "' \/\;: L~'~' ~ ~-r. . 3~~:~ ~/~"1 ::('. ..E "f './). a~"" ~.. . ~ /, .. ~ sc III L( . . . . The purpose of this petition is to permanently remove the basketball court on the corner of Martha and Aspen Streets in the City of Stillwater. Our neighborhood is being subjected to the following conditions: · Loud noise and profanity at all hours of the day · Personal threats to life and property · Property damage in the form of broken windows · Trespass that includes exposure and urination · Alcohol consumption by both adults and minors We have worked with the Parks Commission, the City Council, and most recently, the Stillwater Police Department to solve these problems but they have grown increasingly worse. It is time to remove the basketball court and return quiet and safety to the neighborhood. Nam, ~rbff .t/.Jt1.AG Address ? Z Lf / It,! /AI / L~ /:/1/;/ ~ . . . saint Paul Division of Parks and Recreation Revenue Policy I. Mission statement The Division's mission is to develop, operate, maintain and preserve a system of public parks, open space areas, natural resources, and recreation facilities to ensure the provision of cultural and recreational opportunities for all segments of the population. II. Authority and Responsibility The revenue policy was reviewed by the City of saint Paul Parks and Recreation Commission and was recommended for approval by the saint Paul City Council on May 12, 1992. The saint Paul City Council adopted the policy on III. Policy Review This policy shall be reviewed and updated annually by a revenue policy review committee made up of the following: Two representatives of the Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Commission, the Superintendent of Parks and Recreation, and two Parks and Recreation Division Managers. IV. The review process shall be completed by October 15th of each year. Any changes or additions to the policy shall be implemented as of January 1 of the fol~owing year. Statement of Philosophy The basic philosophy of Saint Paul's parks and recreation program is to offer year round diversified recreational services, ensuring that all citizens have equal opportunity for participation. However, since the demand upon the Division is greater than the public'S ability to appropriate public funds to support that demand, it becomes necessary to identify a variety of supplemental revenue sources to support these services. These alternative sources will include fees and charges -1- . . '- v. for services, lease agreements where a recreational service is provided to the public by the private sector and leases of Parks and Recreation land to private sector non-parks related activities. In the latter case any lease of public land should be examined to insure that a public good is served or a public purpose will be achieved before such a lease is implemented. Fees and charges and other revenue generated will supplement appropriated funds, not replace them or be used to diminish government's responsibility to provide for basic parks and recreation services. The implementation of fees and charges must always be measured against the pUblic's ability to pay, the ability of the Division to serve all citizens in an equitable manner and the Division's ability to collect fees practically and economically. strategies such as group rates, vouchers, free days and scholarships should be used to insure equity. Need for Revenue Due to the diversity and variety of programs and services offered by the Division of Parks and Recreation there is a never ending demand for revenue. Secondly because of the public's demand for new and expanded services this revenue demand has and will continue to outgrow the City's ability to fund all requested services. Therefore, an analysis of how various services are financed is necessary. A. Services 1. Basic Services The City will continue to deliver what has traditionally been considered the basic Parks and Recreation services at no charge to users. These services should provide for the preservation of natural resources as well as promote the physical, social and mental health of the citizens of Saint Paul. Additional programs and facilities that serve a large portion of the population should be general fund supported. Such services as picnic areas, parks, trails, recreation centers, playing fields and concerts fall into this category. 2. specialized Basic services Several parks and recreation services which are common to most parks and recreation agencies in -2- ~ . . . the United states will continue to receive general fund support to help offset their costs. Due to the high cost of providing such services the users cannot be expected to provide for the entire cost of the services. However, because the specialized nature of the services and the somewhat limited user group it is necessary and appropriate for the user to share in the cost of providing the service. The Division of Parks and Recreation will review each service to determine the percentage of cost that should be recovered through fees. The fees that are set should not unduly impact on the Division goal to service all citizens in an equitable manner. Services that fit this category include swimming pools, various activity classes, ski programs, youth athletic programs and some special events. 3. Cost Recovery Services Several services offered by the Division of Parks and Recreation are of such a specialized nature, requiring a single use facility or serving a small portion of the population, that it is appropriate that the users be responsible for the entire cost of the program. Fees for such programs will be set to ensure that total projected cost recovery will be achieved. Services found in this category include golf, marinas, adult athletic programs, many special events, and rental programs (canoes, sailboats, etc.) 4. Profit Making Services Some services offered by the Parks and Recreation Division will not only pay their own costs but will also provide a profit that can be used to subsidize other services that are unable to generate significant revenue for their own support. Justification for this practice is that these activities will have exclusive use of a facility or park land that is usually available to the public. Such activities are usually run by a private business or promoter that is trying to secure a profit from its operation. Services in this category include special events such as festivals, craft fairs, tournaments, amusement rides and food concessions. -3- . . . VI. B. Capital Improvements 1. For the most part, capital improvements to facilities and the acquisition and development of new facilities will be the responsibility of the City's Capital Improvement budget. A second source of revenue available to the Division for capital improvements is the Metropolitan council, which provides grant funds via its Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission for capital improvements in the City's Regional Parks. Acquiring capital dollars from the Metropolitan Council will continue to be a priority of the Division of Parks and Recreation. 2. It is appropriate for some services offered by the Parks and Recreation Division be responsible for some of their capital improvements either in part or completely. In these cases, the service being offered will be responsible for repayment of capital costs it receives through the various user or rental fees generated by the service. Examples of services that may fall in this category are marinas and golf courses. 3. Capital improvements can also be provided to the system through joint partnership with foundations and other philanthropic organizations. It should be the responsibility of the Division of Parks and Recreation to identify the need for these improvements. The Parks and Recreation Commission and ultimately the City Council will approve such fund raising partnerships. An example of this type of capital improvement relationship is the partnership between the City and the Saint Paul Foundation for improvements to the Como Park Conservatory. 4. In most cases low cost capital improvements to facilities or park lands should be the responsibility of the general operating budget for the activity providing the service. The nature and scope of these improvements will differ from activity to activity depending on the activities ability to generate revenue. Revenue Sources The Division of Parks and Recreation relies on several sources to fund the various services that it provides. -4- . One of the difficulties faced by the Division is the uncertainty that surround funding sources from one budget cycle to another. The dilemma of not knowing if funds will be available to the Division from year to year makes planning for the future difficult. Consistency in planning makes it imperative that the Division identify permanent and consistent revenue sources. These sources should include: A. Taxes The Division must continue to receive tax revenue from local, regional, state and federal sources. When the availability of tax revenues are reduced, the Parks and Recreation Division should not be asked to absorb a disproportionate share of this reduction when compared to other City services. Secondly, the City and the Division must continue to lobby for State revenues issued through the Metropolitan Council to be used for the operation and maintenance of regional parks as well as for capital improvements. B. Grants . The Division of Parks and Recreation will pursue grants that will enable it to accomplish its mission and better serve the public. Grants will be pursued for the following purposes: 1. Studies to determine public needs, wants and desires. 2. Feasibility studies to determine what new or expanded services could/should be implemented by the Division. 3. Inventories of Parks and Recreation owned resources. 4. Determine potential future programs. 5. Capital improvements including both natural resources and man made resources. 6. Scholarships that allow for the use of services that require fees by those not able to pay the fees. C. User Fees . The amount and type of user fees charged by the Division of Parks and Recreation will be determined -5- . on a case by case basis. Any increases in fees should be tied to rising costs to produce the service. Before a user fee is implemented the Division will use all or some of the following criteria to determine its feasibility. 1. Determine actual or projected operating and maintenance costs. 2. Estimate" the public good, need or want that will be attained through the service. 3. Compare fees charged by other public agencies providing the same service. 4. Determine the cost to operate a fee program. 5. What level of program cost will the user fee cover. 6. What is the cost to control access to a service or facility. 7. What does the private sector charge for the service. . 8. What barriers will the user fee create. 9. will the user fee enhance the service being provided. D. Service Charges The Division of Parks and Recreation may recommend to the Parks Commission, City Council and Mayor the installation of a service charge to pay for certain services that are provided that enhance a citizens business or residence. Tree trimming and grass cutting on parkways and boulevards are two services where a service charge may be appropriate. E. Leases The Division of Parks and Recreation will lease parkland to the private sector or other public agencies in the following instances: 1. To enhance the Division's recreational services menu by offering services that the Division cannot provide due to an absence of capital dollars. . -6- . 2. To provide a recreational service to the public that can best be provided by the private sector due to the private sector's ability to deliver the particular service in a more efficient manner. 3. To generate revenue for the Division by leasing land to the private sector for non-recreational purposes. criteria to be used to determine the feasibility of this type of lease include: a} Is there a public benefit from the lease. b} Any structure on the leased premises must be located so that it does not interfere with the present use of the land area. c} The location of any structure on the premises may not restrict any planned future uses for the site in so far as they are known. (Should a plan be in the early developmental stages, leasee must agree to relocate from the site at a future date. (Expansion, change in use, etc.)} . d} The structure can be incorporated into the site so that its appearance does not unduly detract from the park, athletic field setting, or the neighborhood. e} The Division of Parks and Recreation will receive just compensation for space it leases. f} The leasee must agree to obtain and pay for all approvals, permits, etc. from the City and any other governing body, as may be necessary or required for placing of a structure on the leased site. F. Concessions 1. The Division of Parks and Recreation will operate food concessions at its facilities to serve food as an amenity to the prime service being offered at the facility. . 2. It is the policy that concessions operated by the Division must be operated on a for profit basis so that revenues generated can help offset the cost of the prime service, or be used to reduce the costs of other parks and recreation services. -7- . 3. The Division of Parks and Recreation will determine if it should self operate or lease out concessions operations. Criteria to make this determination include: a) The ability to run concession profitably. b) The ability to provide quality service at the concession. c) Private sector interest in the concessions. d) Amount of revenue the Division will receive through self operation versus lease out. G. Rentals The Division of Parks and Recreation will rent out facilities and equipment for recreational purposes. 1. Facilities . It is the policy of the Division of Parks and Recreation that in setting fees for facility rentals, the fee charged will provide for all direct and indirect expenses created by the rental, plus provide a profit for the Division. 2. Equipment Rentals The Division of Parks and Recreation will provide equipment rental opportunities to the public which may not normally be available to them due to the cost of the equipment or the publics inability to transport their equipment to a usable site within a parks and recreation setting. Rates for equipment rental should be set to recover the staff time involved in providing the service and to help defray the cost of purchasing the equipment by the Division and/or to help build a replacement fund for the equipment. 3. Space in Parks and Recreation Facilities Rented to Other Agencies. . On a space available basis the Division may rent space in its facilities to other agencies under the following conditions. -8- . a) The space rented is not needed by the Division. b) The renter pays its fair share of the cost to operate the Parks and Recreation facility based on the square footage being rented versus cost to operate the entire facility. c) The agency renting space provides a public good that is consistent with City of saint Paul and Division of Parks and Recreation goals and objectives. H. Permits The Division of Parks and Recreation will issue permits for exclusive use of Parks and Recreation facilities or areas for short periods of time. A permit fee will be charged which reflects the costs incurred by the Division due to the user of the facility. In addition the fee will include revenue for overhead to administer the permit and to pay for the continuing upkeep and maintenance of the facility. Activities in this category include picnic pavilion permits and cave exploration permits. . I. Fund Raising 1. Internal From time to time it may become necessary for the Division to embark on fund raising campaigns for a particular facility or program. This is appropriate when a program or facility will be used by a limited number of people and those individuals are involved in the fund raising project. Secondly, fund ralslng for large projects that provide service to everyone is appropriate because it allows for total community support of a project that will serve the entire community. Fund raising criteria include: a) will the majority of the revenue raised be used for the project and not siphoned off for overhead or fund raising expenses. . b) will the fund raising effort provide a facility or program that is open to everyone. -9- , ,. l . Puq>ose: Policy: Washington County Parks Section Commercial Use Policy The Parks Section mission is to develop, operate, maintain and preserve a system of public parks, open space areas, natural resources, and recreation facilities to ensure the provision of cultural and recreational opportunities for all segments of Washington County residents. The natural resources, wildlife, and unique physical amenities within the Washington County Parks make them desirable for additional activities which may not be offered by the Parks section. The purpose of the Parks Section is to protect the public interest, the natural resources, the investment in the park system, and provide for planned public use. Reasonable fees shall be charged for the specific/exclusive uses of park properties and facilities that result in commercial gain and benefit. Washington County prohibits the use of its property in conjunction with commercial activities unless specifically authorized. Procedure: All special use permits must be requested in writing through the Parks Manager. It shall be the requesters responsibility to advise the Parks Manager of needs beyond existing park facilities and anticipated demands on existing facilities. . 1. 2. 3. 4. tit 5. Upon written notification of park use, the Parks Manager, or designee, shall discuss conditions of use and prepare a permit that designates area/facilities, time and conditions of use. Fees for park activities which can be considered "usual/standard" shall be established by the Washington County Board of Commissioners. Fees for "unusual" park activities will be negotiated and established by the Deputy Director of Operations. Factors to be considered in establishing the user fee are as follows: The commercial value of the activity Extraordinary services required of the Parks Section Size of area and type of facilities requested Impact on park areas Comparable fees charged by other agencies I , . . . tit 6. Number of days requested 7. The promotional value of the activity 8. A Certificate of Insurance is required prior to approval of a special use permit. FN/commercial Stillwater Parks and Recreation Board Meeting February 26,2001 Present: David Junker, Wally Milbrandt, Linda Amrein, Dawn Flinn, Sandy Snellman, Rob McGarry, Mike Polehna Staff Present: Sue Fizgerald, City Planner, Steve Russell, Community Development Director, and Police Chief Larry Dauffenbach Absent: None Call to Order: Vice Chair Mike Polehna called the meeting to Order at 7: 15 p.m. Introduction of New Member: New Member Sandy Snellman was introduced as the newest member of the Stillwater Parks and Recreation Board. All members present introduced themselves. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair: A motion was made by Ms. Snellman to nominate Mr. Polehna as Chairperson. Mr. Milbrandt seconded the motion. Hearing no other nominations, a vote was taken. All were in favor by vote. A motion was made by Mr. Milbrant to nominate Ms. Amrein to Vice Chair. Mr. Junker seconded the nomination. Hearing no other nominations, a vote was taken. All members were in favor. Approval of the Minutes of December 11. 2000: A motion was made by Mr. Milbrant to accept the minutes of the meeting for December 11, 2000. Mr. Junker seconded the motion. Hearing no comment, a vote was taken. All were in favor of accepting the minutes. Lowell Park Plan Implementation: Mr. Russell explained that six years ago the city had applied for $250,000 from the state to assist with the plan implementation. A map of the Recreation Site Plan of Lowell Park at Mulberry Point was presented as prepared by Sanders Wacker, Bergly, Inc. The Site Plan Map included: playground-young children, perennial garden, playground-older children, restroom-future phase, picnicking, gazebo, or park feature/memorial-future phase and an overlook. di Mr. Russell explained that the City hast{ 80,000 in the CapItal Improvements Program for 2001. Mr. Russell also explained that the city has expressed a strong desire to have a restroom constructed in Lowell Park as shown in the plan. The cost of a constructed restroom is around $150,000. Mr. Junker said that the sewer is already in place at that location and should reduce the cost. Mr. Russell thought that to move events to the north of the Chestnut area would be advantageous to ease the parking problems. DISCUSSION: Mr. Milbrant said that he did not think that playground equipment would be correct as he thought it would be shortchanging our events planning. Mr. Polehna did not believe that playground equipment would be appropriate. Mr. Russell said that there are sitting sculptures that could be sat on by the children that may be appropriate and considered playground equipment. Mr. Junker questioned if Mulberry Point would have an open-faced gazebo and how close it was in proximity to the neighboring business and if that would be a problem. Parks and Recreation Meeting February 26, 2001 Discussion followed regarding the restrooms and placement of the restrooms. It was suggested that there would be two restrooms: One by the Dock Restaurant with multiple stalls and a visitors center connection. Mr. Polehna suggested that all the materials be the same in all the restroom designed and that there should be high quality for the restroom. Mr. McGarry believed that the restroom should be constructed the best possible way or right way. Mr. Polehna said that he would volunteer in as a technical advisory and Mr. Milbrant also offered to be on a subcommittee to study the restroom construction. The question of maintenance came up as to who would maintain the restroom and keep them clean and what the cost would be. There was much discussion regarding the types of lawn grass and how the grass would hold up. The issue of flooding and the issue ofa lot of use were discussed. It was determined that there is a special kind of grass that can be used that holds up better than other grasses. Applying the new grasses was discussed as the north or south end could be closed for reseeding. The north end has not been fully developed. The question of irrigation of grass was mentioned. The proposal of a three-foot floodwall was discussed as it is in the plans. The issue of lighting was questioned in regard to plans for park lighting. REVIEW OF LOWELL PARK USE POLICY. There were a number of issues surrounding the use of Lowell Park to be presented: Number and duration of events, cost to the City (police, public works, parks), availability of park to local residents when special events underway, public vs. private for profit use, security concerns, alcohol use, public facilities provided (restroom), city subsidy to use of park, private security provided, impact of use on downtown businesses and reduced parking, impact on physical park conditions (grass, restroom), existing activities, Lumberjack Days, Taste of Stillwater, Art fairs and boater access to park. Mr. Russell explained that the city stafffelt that the uses within the parks and the types of uses in the park should have a use policy so that the city can respond to the policy rather than have policies set for each event as it happens. Mr. Polehna suggested that other cities that have policies in place should be contacted to see how they have set policies for events within their cities. The perspective of the local businesses and the visitors was discussed. A Memorandum was presented from Tim Thomsen, the Public Works Superintendent GUIDELINES FOR USE OF STILLWATER PARKS BY THE STILLWATER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. The Chamber of Commerce believes that they must remain at their current activity level. The Chamber also believes that these current events must not be allowed to escalate to a higher impact level number and that a rest period in between events is necessary. The impact levels, which explain, rest periods and the level criteria (number of vendors, people, length of time of event and use of space) were discussed. There are eight events scheduled for this year. Mr. Russell explained that the city losses are $12,000 in loss parking revenues for these events. Mr. Polehna said that the City of Winona has a commercial use fee pennit and he said that he would check on this. Mr. Russell said that the Parks Board should have something like a "Vision for Park" to be presented to the public. POLICE DEPARTMENT CONCERNS FOR THE PARK. Police Chief Dauffenbach presented some concerns for the public events held in the park. There were concerns for park safety regarding lighting. Some lighting should be left on. Although there is an Ordinance for no alcohol in the parks, on event days there are. Police chief suggested that a "beer garden" be used if the city moves to the north end as the less the alcohol consumption the less the problems are. 2 , Parks and Recreation Board February 26,2001 Another problem is the people crossing the street at Chestnut Street. Police Chief Dauffenbach said that there are always slips and falls, accidents and speeding and bike control. A lot of problems are alcohol and alcohol related and every weekend is busy. There is a lot of overtime on the weekends and events. Update Staples Field Questionnaire. The results of the Staples Park Survey were made available to the Board. At question is the basketball court that has been at its current site for 25 years. There had been a signed complaint that the noise from the court was causing problems and some problems with manners at the court by some individuals who used the courts. The court had been updated just two years ago. Ms. Snellman said that the survey did not tell the Board members very much in regard to complaints. Mr. Polehna said that action does need to be taken because the houses sit too close to the court. Mr. Junker said that it would be placed on the city councils agenda. Removing the court was one option that was discussed. Amundson Subdivision Park Dedication. The property in question is behind a row of lots on Amundson Drive known as Outlot B. To the north is West St. Croix Avenue accessible by Street C and B and A located in Oak Glen. Mr. Dave Neu~an was present to explain the park. This is a 21-10t subdivision of townhouses (indiVidual) and they have a homeowners association. These are all detached townhomes on small lots. Price range is from $325,000 to a million dollars plus.c,~t\~'V ~I'I/./ . The park is adjacent to th~chool and there is a pond that the school uses for school projects. Mr. Neu'man said that an Wisconsin ecological firm is trying to do a new way of treating storm w~: completely above ground and that they have a grant to monitor what we are doing. Mr. Neu an said that it is a project ofleast impact Mr. Junker said he would like to see some shrubs and the question of public access was questioned. The question of moving some lots a little to provide better access was discussed to better define the public trail or parkway. The park was defined as a visual part of this neighborhood. The issue will go before the planning commission in March. With better access for the public parkway, a motion was made to approve the park dedication. MOTION: A motion was made by Dawn Flinn to accept the proposal with improved public access and seconded by Mr. Junker. All were in favor of approval. Aiple PropertY Park Plan Update. The adopted Aiple Property Park Plan has been reviewed and revised based on the latest bridge location. Mr. Junker questioned if any grant money was available to improve the park by adding security and lighting. It is thought to be a two million-dollar project to do demolition of the ,. existing structure and finish the vision for the park. A suggestion from Mr. Russell was to form a f ~ _; 1 Ii:N committee to enerate funding for the roo ect. A tourism tax was suggested. \jJ1V~~I,. (- -- Mr. Russell said that the CIty Id purcha~ht of way from Nelson Street to Sunnyside (l Marina and that there was a capital improvement plan in place. l' MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Junker to approve the updated plans for the Aiple property Mr. McGarry seconded the motion. All were in favor of approval. CDBG Park Grant Request. The city has applied for $50,000 of funds for construction of playground equipment at the old athletic field and $43,000 for construction of park improvements to Staples Field. The money will be available July 2001. This is a community Development Block Grant 3 ~ Parks and Recreation Board February 26, 2001 Other items: Mr. Milbrandt mentioned the potential of a volleyball court complex. Mr. Milbrandt also mentioned restriction form use of any snowmobiles on Myrtle Street. Mr. Polehna said that the city council would have to give approval for any ban of snowmobiles on Myrtle Street. Adjournment: Mr. Polehna adjourned the meeting at 9: 10 p.m. Respectfully Submitted Diane Martinek Recording Secretary 4