|
Parks
and Recreation Commission
|
Meeting
Minutes
April 2, 2013
PRESENT: Azer, Boehm, Diedrick, Doneen, Gelbach,
D. Holt, M. Holt, Simbeck, Stoner and Wall
ABSENT: None
STAFF:
Brokke, Evenson
OTHERS: Jason
Etten, Michael Schroeder, LHB
1. INTRODUCTIONS/ROLL
CALL/PUBLIC COMMENT
None
2. APPROVAL OF
MINUTES – MARCH 5, 2013 MEETING
Commission Recommendation: Minutes
for the March 5, 2013 meeting were approved as presented with Commissioners
Azer and Wall abstaining because they were not at the meeting.
3.
Administer Oath of
Office to New Commissioners
Chair Holt administered the Oath of
Office to newly appointed Commissioners Philip Gelbach and Jerry Stoner. The
Commission welcomed the new Commissioners.
4.
Recognize Former
Commissioner and Chair Jason Etten
Staff presented the 2012 Board and
Commission Award on behalf of the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association
(MRPA) former Commission Chair, Jason Etten. The award is presented annually to
one member of a citizen advisory or policy making park board in the State of
Minnesota in the parks and recreation field. Mr. Etten received this award for
his leadership in working with the Commission, the community, City Council and City
staff to help create the future direction for Roseville Parks and Recreation through
the Master Plan and Parks and Recreation Renewal Program.
Mr. Etten thanked the Commission
and the MRPA as he accepted the award on behalf of the Commission and the
community and that it involved a lot of people. Mr. Etten mentioned that he
looked forward to working with the community and Commission again on furthering
the vision for the implementation effort.
Commissioners congratulated Mr.
Etten for this much deserving award.
5. PARKS AND
RECREATION RENEWAL PROGRAM
Staff introduced Michael Schroeder
from LHB. Schroeder explained the process used to get to the preliminary plans
and presented the following first sets:
·
Harriet
Alexander Nature Center (in collaboration with FORHANC and FOR Parks)
·
Lexington
Park
·
Villa
Park
·
Autumn
Grove Park
HANC
The Commission discussion, comments and
considerations on the HANC plans included items such as the boardwalk railing, overall
accessibility compliance, wetland water levels, environmental design efforts
including use of recyclables and reclaimed steel, indoor and outdoor lighting, storm
water management and area educational signage. Questions were raised as to the
scope of the Renewal Program and funding levels. Doneen noted from the summary
notes that there was an appearance of interest in enhanced programming and
volunteer efforts.
Schroeder responded to questions about the
summary notes and explained the weight and priority system.
Schroeder offered his time to meet with any
Commission members or members of the public at City Hall or a park to better
understand their ideas/issues/interests. Staff indicated that Schroeder has
also been meeting with affiliated groups and has encouraged others to come in
and share their thoughts and ideas.
Commissioner Diedrick indicated she was
present at the HANC meetings and others and is encouraged by how people can
have an impact on the park system.
LEXINGTON PARK
Commission discussion and comments on the Lexington
Park Preliminary plans included questions on the overall budget and scope, building
location as it relates to current area utilities such as sewer and water and
interest in the interior trails.
VILLA PARK
Commission discussion and comments on the Villa
Park Preliminary plans included questions on the parking lot displacement,
trail enhancements and what all was being done as part of the Renewal project.
Commissioners felt it was unclear as to what projects were being completed as
part of the renewal phase and what was not. Schroeder explained that each
preliminary plan conceptualizes the park in a “big picture” in order to bring
to light any issues and/or ideas that may have been missed or that may be able
to be incorporated and also sets the park up for the future.
Schroeder expressed the interest of the
community and guidance in the Master Plan to suggest that the parks in
Roseville be elevated to a new level with the Renewal Program. This effort is
not treated like a shopping expedition but rather a thoughtful, diligent approach
to the future.
D. Holt commented that what is being done
now as part of the Renewal Program aligns with the Master Plan and is not intended
to be the end of improvements to the system in the future.
AUTUMN GROVE PARK
Staff reviewed the Renewal Program projects
and budgets. Commission discussion and comments on the Autumn Grove Park
Preliminary Plans included the need to provide a balance for parking needs and
the potential safety hazards with on road parking. Gelbach suggested discussing
shared parking with Advent Lutheran Church located across the street. Schroeder
indicated that these were similar topics and discussion at the neighborhood
meetings.
Azer indicated that it was evident that
pedestrian transportation is of high importance in the community and it keeps
coming up. There was discussion on the feasibility of a bridge or tunnel for
safe moving. Schroeder expressed some of the challenges to this including span
lengths, expense and necessary ramps. D. Holt encouraged commission members to
go out and visit the site and provide ideas and input to Schroeder and Evenson.
Referencing the meeting summaries, Doneen mentioned
the overall appearance on the popularity of internal park trails and how they may
claim some dollars from the pathways and trails Renewal Program budget and
should be considered by the Natural Resources and Trails Subcommittee (NRATS).
OTHER
Commissioners discussed and commented on
the preliminary plans in general and the appearance of confusion on the scope
of the specific renewal projects. Schroeder indicated that each preliminary
plan creates a conceptual “big picture” including the renewal program. They
also help to identify other potential issues and ideas that may be able to be
addressed with the renewal program at no cost or very low cost. It also
continues to build on a vision for the future. After discussion, it was
suggested that all preliminary plans include a call out to the Renewal projects
that are funded so that people understand better what is being done as a part
of the Renewal phase and what is not. There was also interest in providing an
estimate for projects that are outside the scope of the Renewal Program but are
included in the preliminary plans.
Doneen indicated that the NRATS met once
since the last commission meeting and reviewed feedback from the B2 sidewalk
meeting. They are in the process of developing a frequently asked questions
list for this project. He also pointed out that B2 is a significant part of the
Renewal Program budget but internal park trails look pretty popular so may hold
off on other prioritizing of projects to see what all comes out of the
preliminary park plans. Reservoir Woods meeting will be on April 13, 2013 to
discuss Natural Resource Projects and in particular a pilot buckthorn project
that will be happening soon, weather permitting. The group is waiting for the
Natural Resource Consultant to be on board.
Staff reviewed the process and outlined the
next step from the preliminary plans reviewed tonight. They will be brought to
the City Council in May for their review prior to the preparation of final
construction documents, then construction to begin in the fall. Following the
completion of preliminary plans, the next neighborhood interaction will include
a construction inform notice to the nearby park neighborhoods. Another set of
preliminary plans will be brought to the May commission meeting for review.
Staff provided an update on the selection
process for the Playground Vendor and the Natural Resource Consultant. Both are
in the final clarification stages with a recommendation expected to be made to
the City Council in April. Thanks to Commissioner Wall for being part of the playground
process and Commissioner Doneen for being part of the natural resource process.
Wall commented on how the process requires vendors to be
diligent and that they clearly understand
the project and what is expected of them.
6. Park Board Discussion
D. Holt introduced the topic and indicated that this was a topic of
interest by the City Council
and that it is was important that the Commission provide an analysis and
recommendation to the City Council.
Wall indicated that he, Simbeck and staff have been working to compile information.
He reviewed the draft #1 research and analysis report dated 4/2/13 that
included the background, history, park board characteristics, a start of a pros
and cons list. He also mentioned that he and staff met with the Director and
Board Chair of Maple Grove Parks and Recreation and attended their meeting. His
observations were that it appeared to operate in a similar way to Roseville.
Wall suggested that further discussion and analysis of what is in the
best interests of the City of Roseville and its residents occur in May in
preparation for the June 10th joint City Council/Commission meeting.
Wall communicated his impression of the Maple Grove visit as follows:
·
They appear to operate
similar to Roseville even though they are a Park Board
·
Users and stakeholders appear
satisfied
·
They like the system that they
are operating under
·
Maple Grove is a very good
model
·
Appointments are made by the
mayor and confirmed by the City Council which is similar to Roseville
·
The community center is very
impressive
Staff indicated that procedurally a Park Board is more involved in
staffing and budget development with the City Council approving a levy. It
would operate similar to the Roseville HRA.
According to the City Code, the Roseville Commission is advisory only
and is probably going beyond their scope of work.
Further discussion included how long Maple Grove has been a Park Board, questions
on board members pay and how the City Council is kept informed. Response
included that Maple Grove has been a Park Board since inception, board members
are not paid but it is believed that Brainerd Park Board Members are paid a
stipend of $25 month and the City Council in Maple Grove is kept informed
through a quarterly report provide by the director. Larger items such as land
acquisition and certain level of projects are reviewed by the City Council.
Diedrick wondered about the interaction with other City Departments in
Maple Grove. Response was that the director attends department head meetings
and the need for interdepartmental coordination and cooperation still is
important and exists.
Doneen provided his analysis on the primary difference between a Park
Board and Commission. Specifically, the day to day operations and project
development moves away from the City Council with the responsibility given to
the Park Board. A Park Board would be a more focused, separate board relieving
certain duties from the City Council.
Gelbach questioned whether increased accountability and responsibility means
increased liability for board members.
Azer was complimentary of the existing Commission structure but is
interested and would like to learn more.
D. Holt reiterated that the charge of the Commission is to research the topic
and provide information to the City Council so they can make a decision.
Responding to D. Holt, staff indicated that because of the importance
Roseville residents place on their parks and recreation system, that at some
point, the consideration of a Park Board may be advantageous for Roseville. As
guided by the recently updated Master Plan it is suggested that Roseville
consider a Park District, which is not currently allowed by State Law. A Park Board
seems like it could be a logical progression for Roseville.
The Commission thanked Wall and Simbeck for their work. More discussion
will occur at the May meeting.
7.
Josephine Heights Park
Dedication
Chair D. Holt introduced the item
and indicated that the information was in the packet and wondered if there were
any detail questions. Staff provided a brief review of the site and project.
Commission Recommendation:
Doneen moved, Simbeck seconded to
recommend that cash be accepted in the Josephine Heights proposed development
to satisfy the Park Dedication requirement. Motion passed unanimously.
8. STAFF REPORT
·
Ethics training is scheduled for April 10
·
City Attorney will be meeting with the Parks and Recreation
Commission on May 7. City Attorney to review data practices, open meeting law,
electronic communications.
·
An update of Emerald Ash Borer was given that it is now in the NW
Quadrant with more cases identified.
·
Announced the upcoming annual Ice show on April 26th,
27th and 28th.
9. OTHER
·
None
Meeting adjourned at 9:30pm
Respectfully Submitted,
Lonnie Brokke, Director
