Loading...
2004-10-12 Parks and Rec Comm Agenda PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AGENDA PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Tuesday, October 12,200 6:30 p.m. — Council Chambers NOTE: THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION WILL HOLD A WORKSHOP ON LOCATION AT MENDAKOTA PARK TO DISCUSS PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT FROM 6:00 PM TO 6:25 PM BEFORE CONVENING THE REGULAR MEETING AT CITY HALL AT 6:30 PM. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3, September 9, 2004 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes 4. Resident Comments Regarding Par 3 Golf Course 5, Skating Rink Operations (Rescheduled to November) 6, MHAA Request for New Surfacing in Batting Cage at Mendakota Park 7, Special Park Fund 8. Updates on Engineering Projects that include Trail Improvements 9, Verbal Updates • Flag Football at Mendakota Park • Recreation Programmer's Update • Police Report (available Tuesday) 10, Other Comments 11, Adjoum Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If a notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every attempt to provide the aids. This may not, however, be possible on short notice. Please contact City Administration at (651) 452-1850 with requests. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 The September 2004 meeting of the Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Commission was held on Thursday, September 9, 2004 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve. (This meeting was rescheduled from September 14, 2004 in order to avoid conflict with the Primary Election.) The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Richard Spicer and Commissioners Dave Libra, Missie Hickey, Larry Craighead, and Paul Portz. Commissioners Stan Linnell and Raymond Morris were excused from the meeting. City Staff present were Parks Project Manager Guy Kullander and Administrative Assistant Patrick C. Hollister. Recreation Programmer Teresa Gangelhoff was excused due to illness. Mr. Hollister took the minutes. MINUTES Commissioner Libra moved approval of the August 10, 2004 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes with one typographical revision. Commissioner Craighead seconded the motion. AYES: NAYS: RECREATION PROGRAMMER'S UPDATE Mr. Hollister explained that Ms. Gangelhoff had been excused because of allergies. Chair Spicer asked if there would be a fall softball league. Mr. Hollister replied that at far as he knew, there was none. Commissioner Craighead noted that the tennis program had received a nice donation. FLAG FOOTBALL AT MENDAKOTA PARK (Councilmember Mary Jeanne Schneeman was present for this discussion.) Spicer said that Councilmember Schneeman had expressed concern that the skating rinks were too expensive to operate in light of how little usage they received. Chair Spicer said that although he disagrees with the Councilmember on this point, he wanted City Staff to place this item on the October Parks and Recreation Commission agenda. Chair Spicer asked Staff to research the costs of rink operation and maintenance and to bring back the numbers compiled by the rink attendants on usage for the October meeting. Commissioner Craighead said that he also felt that the rinks have received impressive usage over the last two years, particularly in light of how short the last two winters have been, and that he knew of some residents who would like the City to build one additional rink instead of removing rinks. DRAFT 2005 CITY PARKS BUDGET Mr. Kullander reported that the Council had granted eight out of the Commission's ten requests for parks funding in the draft 2005 City parks budget, including requests regarding trails. Mr. Kullander said that the Council did not approve the requested $10,000 for planning grant applications and had not approved an alternative revenue source for the Special Parks Fund. Mr. Kullander said that instead the Council had suggested spending down the existing balance of the Special Parks Fund, Chair Spicer said that he was grateful to the Council for the eight requests that they approved, but that he did not want to spend down the existing Special Parks Fund and wished to maintain a minimum balance of $300,000 in the fund. PARKS FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Mr. Kullander presented the draft Parks Five Year Capital Improvement Plan and asked for feedback. Commissioner Libra said that he liked items 1-4 for 2005. Commissioner Libra said that he would like to see the trail on the east side of Dodd Road from Town Center to Marie Avenue paid for from a source other than the Special Parks Fund, such as MSA funds. Mr. Kullander agreed and said that installation of the trail on the east side of Dodd Road would probably have to wait until the townhomes along Dodd Road were finished in 2006 or 2007. Chair Spicer asked if lowering the amounts allocated for the Wentworth and Marie playground equipment would compromise safety. Mr. Kullander responded that it would not. Commissioner Libra seconded the motion. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS �11uT_[�7 October /, 2004 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Patrick C. Hollister, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Resident Comments Regarding Par 3 Golf Course Discussion The State Court of Appeals recently ruled in favor of the owners of the Par 3 golf course who are seeking a change in the comprehensive plan designation from GC to LR in order to accommodate single-family residential development. Attached is a copy of the decision. The City has thirty days to respond to the decision. The Council met in closed session after the regular meeting on October 5 and will met again in closed session after the regular meeting on October 19 to discuss the City's response. Staff has learned that several residents plan to attend the Parks Commission meeting to express their feelings on this matter. Staff recommends that the Commission allow the residents to express their opinions. Those statements will be part of the minutes from this meeting for acknowledgement by the Council at their October 19, 2004 meeting. Because the litigation on this matter is still ongoing, however, Commissioners with comments or questions for the Council regarding this matter are advised to contact the Mayor and individual Councilmembers directly rather than discuss this matter openly at the Commission meeting. Action Required Staff recommends that the Commission allow the residents to express their opinions regarding Par 3. Those statements will be part of the minutes from this meeting for acknowledgement by the Council at their October 19, 2004 meeting. Mendota Golf v Mendota Heights, A04-206 Page 1 of 7 This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. ,� 480A.08, subd. 3 (2002). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A04-206 Mendota Golf, LLP, petitioner, Respondent, vs. City of Mendota Heights, Appellant. Filed September 28, 2004 Affirmed Robert H. Schumacher, Judge Dakota County District Court File No. C003009146 Todd Rapp, S. Todd Rapp, P.A., 15025 Glazier Avenue, Suite 401, Apple Valley, MN 55124 (for respondent) Clifford M. Greene, Greene Espel, P.L.L.P., 200 South Sixth Street, Suite 1200, Minneapolis, MN 55402; and Pierre N. Regnier, Jessica E. Schwie, Jardine, Logan and O'Brien, P.L.L.P., 8519 Eagle Point Boulevard, Suite 100, Lake Elmo, MN 55042; and Daniel S. Schleck, Winthrop & Weinstine, P.A., 225 South Sixth Street, Suite 3500, Minneapolis, MN 55402 (for appellant) Considered and decided by Schumacher, Presiding Judge; Halbrooks, Judge; and Parker, Judge. - UNPUBLISHED OPINION ROBERT H. SCHUMACHER, Judge The district court granted respondent Mendota Golf, LLP summary judgment on its petition for mandamus to compel appellant City of Mendota Heights to start the process to amend its comprehensive plan � manner that would allow development of Mendota Golfs land in a manner consistent with the zoning ordinance. We affirm. FACTS http://www.courts.state.mn.us/opinions/coa/current/opa040206-0928.htm 10/1/2004 Mendota Golf v Mendota Heights, A04-206 Page 2 of 7 When Mendota Golf bought a golf course in Mendota Heights in 1995, the city's zoning ordinance dr ~gnated the land as residential land (RA), the city's comprehensive plan designated the land as a golf course (GC), and Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 1 (1994) provided that local zoning designations took priority over comprehensive plan designations. Later in 1995, Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 1 was amended to state that conflicts between zoning designations and comprehensive -plan designations were to be reconciled. When the city reviewed its comprehensive plan in 2002, it altered the designations of various properties but not Mendota Golf s land. In 2003, to facilitate a sale of the golf course to a third party who wanted to develop it, Mendota Golf applied to the city to have the city start the process to amend its comprehensive -plan designation of the land from golf course (GC) to low -density residential land (LR). The city denied the application, Mendota Golf petitioned the district court for mandamus to compel the city to start the amendment process, and the district court granted Mendota Golf summary judgment on its petition, issuing mandamus to compel the city to start the process to amend its comprehensive plan. DECISION 1. On appeal from summary judgment, appellate courts examine whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law. State by Cooper v. French, 460 N.W.2d 2, 4 (Minn. 1990); see Minn. R. Civ. P. 56.03 (reciting standard for summary judgments). Mandamus may issue to compel "performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty" and to compel performance of a discretionary act if the failure to perform that act "[is] so arbitrary and capricious as to constitute a clear abuse of discretion." Minn. Stat. § 586.01 (2002); McIntosh v. Davis, 441 N.W.2d 115, 118 (Minn. 1989) (quotation omitted).�1� After the 1995 amendment of Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 1, it stated: "If the comprehensive municipal plan is in conflict with the zoning ordinance, the zoning ordinance shall be brought into conformance with the plan by local government units in conjunction with the review and, if necessary, amendment of its ���nprehensive plan requixed under section 473.864, subdivision 2." 1995 Minn. Laws eh. 176, § 5. Thus, since 1995, conflicts between zoning designations and designations in a comprehensive plan are to be reconciled by amending the zoning ordinance to conform to the comprehensive plan, or by amending the http://www.courts.state.mn.us/opinions/eoa/current/opa040206-0928.htm 10/1/2004 Mendota Uolf v Mendota Heights, A04-206 Page 3 of 7 comprehensive plan during one of the periodic reviews of that plan required by statute. See Minn. Stat, F 473.864, subd. 2 (2002) (requiring certain reviews of comprehensive plan); cf. City of Lake Elmo v. Met. Council, 685 N.W.2d 1, 5 (Minn. 2004) (noting review requirements). Here, it is undisputed that the golf course's zoning -ordinance designation of R-1 would allow the development proposed by the third party. At oral argument in this court, Mendota Golf admitted that the golf course's current comprehensive -plan designation of GC does not allow the proposed development. Thus, in the almost eight years between the reconciliation -requiring 1995 amendment of Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 1 and this dispute, and despite the city's intervening 2002 review of its comprehensive plan, neither the comprehensive plan designation for the golf course nor the zoning -ordinance designation for that golf course was altered. The city failed in its statutory duty to reconcile the designations for the golf course contained in the city's comprehensive plan and its zoning ordinance. The "IMPLEMENTATION" section of the city's comprehensive plan contains a subsection addressing "ORDINANCES." That subsection states: "Mendota Heights Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances will be the i .nary regulations governing future land use and development decisions." Thus, if the district court directed the city to reconcile the discrepancy between the comprehensive-plan's designation of the golf course and the zoning -ordinance's designation of the golf course by amending the zoning ordinance, it would have used the discrepancy as a basis for compelling amendment of the zoning ordinance from a designation that allows the proposed development to a new designation that does not allow the intended development, despite the fact that this particular comprehensive plan contains a peculiar provision stating that the primary authority for development decisions is the zoning ordinance. In other words, to grant mandamus to compel the city to reconcile the discrepancy by amending the zoning ordinance would have been to allow this comprehensive plan's designation of the golf course to govern development decisions despite the fact that this comprehensive plan states that it is the zoning ordinance that is the primary authority for making development decisions. Therefore, the district court did not err by directing the city to satisfy its statutory obligation of rP�onciling the discrepancy between its comprehensive -plan designation of the land and its zoning -ordinance designation of the land by starting the process to amend the comprehensive plan. And the peculiar provision of this comprehensive plan stating that the zoning ordinances are the primary authority governing http://www.courts.state.mn.us/opinions/coa/cunent/opa040206-0928.htm 10/1/2004 Mendota Golf v Mendota Heights, A04-206 Page 4 of 7 development decisions addresses the city's arguments that mandamus is an inappropriate remedy b� -3use the city has no obligation to amend its comprehensive plan, rendering any amendment of that plan inherently discretionary. 2. The city defends its refusal to start the process to amend its comprehensive plan by referring to its ability to preserve "open spaces." There are at least two problems with this argument. First, because the records of the planning commission's meeting and the city council's deliberations on Mendota Golfs application do not include more than passing references by commission and council members to "open spaces," it is not clear that either the commission or the council exercised any ability either entity may have to consider the preservation of open spaces. Second, while a golf course may be space that is open, the comprehensive plan uses separate designations for "Golf Course (GC)" and "Open Space (OS)." And despite the fact that various maps in the comprehensive plan used different designations to refer to the golf course, the portions of the comprehensive plan specifically addressing the golf course designated it as GC before the 2002 review and that designation � ., not changed in the review. Thus, the golf course has not been, and is not currently designated as, the "open space" that the city argues it has the ability to preserve. To avoid these and related problems, the city argues that under Honn v. City of Coon Rapids, 313 N.W.2d 409, 414-15 (Minn. 1981), a court's review of the reasons for a zoning decision is not limited to the reasons articulated by the municipality but must include any reasonable basis for the decision. But this is an appeal from the district court's mandamus decision, not a decision in a municipal zoning matter. Also, Honn addressed the then -existing municipal procedures that had created problems in judicial review of municipal decisions; it states that unless a municipal body has its reasons for its decision recorded or reduced to writing in more than a conclusory fashion, it runs the "risk of not having its decision sustained." Honn, 313 N.W.2d at 416. After citing Honn, Swanson v. City of Bloomington, 421 N.W.2d 307 (Minn. 1988) states that, when tH� municipal procedures are fair and the resulting record is adequate, the "standard of review is whether the municipal body's decision was unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious, with review focused on the legal sufficiency of and factual basis for the reasons given." Id. at 313 (emphasis added). Here, the district court http://www.courts.state.mn.us/opinions/coa/current/opa040206-0928.htm 10/1/2004 •Mendota Golf v Mendota Heights, A04-206 Page 5 of 7 ruled that the municipal proceedings were fair, that determination is not challenged on appeal, and the preservation of "open spaces" is not mentioned in the city council's resolution denying Mendota Golfs application. Thus, it is not clear that Honn requires an "open space" argument to be considered here. We also reject the city's argument that Arcadia Dev. Corp. v. City of Bloomington, 552 NW.2d 281, 289 (Minn. App. 1996), review denied (Minn. Oct. 29, 1996), supports its argument that review is not limited to the articulated reasons for a decision. Arcadia involved adue-process challenge to the city's zoning ordinance itself and it is in this context that Arcadia states that the "rational basis test merely requires the challenged legislation to be supported by any set of facts either known or which could reasonably be assumed" to exist. Id., at 288-89. The current appeal, however, does not involve a challenge to the comprehensive plan or the zoning ordinance. Therefore, Arcadia is distinguishable, and we decline to speculate about unarticulated possible reasons for the city's decision. 3. The district court cited Chanhassen Estates Residents' Assn v. City of Chanhassen, 342 N.W.2d 335 (Minn. 1984) and PTL, LLC v. Chisago County Bd. of Comm's., 656 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. App. 2003), for t proposition that "[w]hen a municipality designates a specific use as permissible in a particular zoning district, the municipality has exercised its discretion, and conclusively determined thereby that such a permitted use is consistent with public health, safety and general welfare, as well as consonant with the goals of its overall Comprehensive Plan." The city argues that these cases do not apply here because Chanhassen was decided before the 1995 amendment of Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 1, and PTL, while decided after the 1995 amendment of Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 1, involved land outside the seven -county metropolitan region, which was not subject to the 1995 amendment of Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. l . The core of the district court's ruling was not a reliance on Chanhassen and PTL as such, but the logical inconsistency between (1) the comprehensive plan's statements that its GC designation (the comprehensive plan's current designation of the golf course) and its LR designation (the proposed amended designation of the golf course) both correspond to the zoning ordinance's R-1 designation; and (2) the city's resolution denying Mendota Golfs proposed amendment of the comprehensive plan because the amendment would "have an adverse impact on the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the community and the surrounding land" and "be adverse to the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance." Here, as the district court http://www.courts.state.mn.us/opinions/coa/cun•ent/opa040206-0928.htm 10/1/2004 Mendota Golf v Mendota Heights, A04-206 Page 6 of 7 observed, under the relevant ordinance "residential uses[] are expressly made a permitted use in R-1 ^Wing districts." Thus, but for the comprehensive plan, the city would, under the zoning ordinance, have to allow the development sought here. See Chanhassen, 342 N.W.2d at 340 (stating local officials lack discretion to deny plat applications that satisfy relevant ordinances). The city, however, denied Mendota Golfs application to amend the comprehensive plan to allow a development that would have to be allowed under the zoning ordinance, purportedly because the development would adversely impact "health, safety, and general welfare" and be "adverse" to the "purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance." How amending the comprehensive plan to allow development that would have to be allowed under the zoning ordinance could adversely impact health, safety and general welfare, or could be contrary to the intent of the zoning ordinance, is neither clear nor explained. While we are aware that the city argues that the phrase "Zoning Ordinance," as used in the city's ordinance denying Mendota Golfs request to amend the comprehensive plan should be read broadly to include r :ence to the comprehensive -plan, because that ordinance refers to both the "Comprehensive Plan" and the "Zoning Ordinance," and because the bulk of the parties' dispute involves distinctions between the zoning ordinance and the comprehensive plan, the usage suggested by the city is unlikely and we decline to read the ordinance as proposed by the city. Even if we did so, however, that reading of the city's ordinance would not address the comprehensive plan's statement that it is the zoning ordinance that is to be the primary authority for addressing questions of land development. Affirmed. Retired judge of the Minnesota Court of Appeals, serving by appointment pursuant to Minn. Const. art. VI, § 10. [1] The ci 's brief cites un ublished authorit to su ort as ects of its ar �' P y pp p gument. Unpublished opinions are of limited value in deciding an appeal. See Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3(c) (2002) (stating "[u] npublished opinions of the court of appeals are not precedential" (emphasis added)); Vlahos v. R & I Constr., Ins 676 N.W.2d 672, 676 n.3 (Minn. 2004) (stating district court erred "both as a matter of law and as a n. ;r of practice" by relying on an unpublished opinion of the court of appeals, "stress[ing] that unpublished opinions of the court of appeals are not precedential" and noting both that "danger of miscitation [of unpublished opinions] is great because unpublished opinions rarely contain a full recitation of the facts" and that "[u]npublished opinions should not be cited by the district court as binding precedent"); Dynamic Air, Inc. http://www.courts.state.mn.us/opinions/coa/current/opa040206-0928.htm 10/1/2004 Mendota Golf v Mendota Heights, A04-206 Page 7 of 7 v. Bloch, 502 N.W.2d 796, 800-01 (Minn. App. 1993) (stating dangers of miscitation and unfairness ' associated with use of unpublished opinions and that while persuasive, "legislature has unequivocally provided that unpublished opinions are not precedential"). http://www.courts. state.mn.us/opinions/coa/current/opa040206-0928.htm 10/1 /2004 City of Mendota Heights MEMORANDUM October 6, 2004 Memo to: Parks 8Recreation Commission From: Guy Kullander, Operations & Projects Coordinator Jk Subject: Skating Rink Operations Discussion of this item will be in November Discussion: Council member Schneeman will be unable to attend the October meeting and asked that this item be addressed at the November meeting. For Your Information: At the September meeting Chair Spicer requested staff to provide the annual costs for maintenance and salaries related to the City's skating rinks. 2003 Total Expenses for Three Parks 1. Electric &Natural Gas for 12 months $ 918.16 2. Telephone (Three cell phones) $ 1,215.18 3. Rink Attendants (8 to 12 weeks) $14,676,52 4. Public Works employee's overtime (3 months) $ 1,600.00 (est) 5. Routine maintenance & repairs $ 2,000.00 (est) Total = $200409.86 Per Park Average = $6, 735.25 Note: a. Recreation Programmers time%xpenses are not included in above b. Other costs not included above: City Hall staff time, copy/duplicating, newspaper ads/notices, and water usage. City of Mendota Heights MEMORANDUM October 6th, 2004 Memo to: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Guy Kullander, Operations & Projects Coordinator Subject: Request from MHAA for New Surfacing Material in Mendakota Park Batting Cage Background: In 1998 the Mendota Heights Athletic Association requested the City to install a double batting cage at Mendakota Park and offered to pay half of the construction costs up to $8,000.00 in three installments. Council approved a recommendation from the Commission and the batting cage plus some additional "add -on" items was completed in 1999 at a total construction cost of $21,915.00, MHAA contributed three payments of $4,334,00 to the City in 1999, 2000, and 2001. (Note: City staff time, costs, and expenses related to this project were not included in the above final cost) Discussion: Gregg Springer (President of MHAA) sent the attached letter requesting the City to install a "semkpermanent" floor (asphalt or synthetic turf) in the double batting cage at Mendakota Park. Asphalt is the least expensive at around $5,000.00 and synthetic turf comes in seven options with an estimated price range from $9,500.00 to $12,500.00. 1 discussed this request, on site, with Terry Blum, Park Leadsperson and both of us agree that the current gravel/rec-rock surfacing is not an unsafe surfacing material and with some minor modifications and an increased level of routine maintenance most of the current criticism of this facility can be addressed. (Rake/remove loose gravel and raise/establish a higher (2 to 3 inches) batter and pitching areas so that rainwater does not collect in these areas that are currently lower than the surrounding areas) The ground where the batting cage is located is very flat and storm waters mostly soak in rather than run-off. Changing the surfacing material will not improve the drainage of this site. Recommendation: I recommend the City not install a new surfacing material in the batting cages but rather reshape (make higher) the batter and pitching areas, remove loose rocks as they appear, and only top dress, in the future, with rec-rock that does not contain gravel. Action Required: A coy of this memo will be mailed to Mr. Springer who may wish to attend the October 12 h meeting to further discuss his request with the Commission. Mendota Heights Athletic Association 161 East Marie Avenue West Saint Paul, MN 55118 Phone: 651-454-0433 September 30, 2004 Guy Kullander Engineering Tech 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Guy: This letter represents a formal request from the Mendota Heights Athletic Association for field improvements at Mendakota Park. Specifically, we believe the present condition of the batting cages at Mendakota is unsafe for our coaches and players to use. We request that the City resurface the batting cages in some semi -permanent manner. The present surface of the batting cages has a gravel base that through use has developed holes and ruts, and loose rocks have emerged. As a result, batted balls often ricochet in unpredictable directions. We are fortunate that injuries to date have been limited to several serious bruises. Without a new surface, we fear the risk of more serious injury. We have talked to Terry Blum at the City and he supports resurfacing the batting cages. In addition to the safety issues, the City's maintenance efforts are adversely affected when the loose rocks spread beyond the cages and into the surrounding grass and sidewalks. It is my understanding that you have received a few bids for this project from Dave Libertini, MHAA's Baseball Commissioner, and Terry Blum. A simple black -top surface will cost approximately $2,500, and a durable, sport -court -type surface will cost approximately $7,000, We would prefer a sport court surface because (i) it is more durable and maintenance -free, (ii) there would be less wear and tear on our equipment (bats, baseball, batting helmets, etc.), and (iii) it would offer better esthetics to Mendakota Park. However, we believe that either option would be a dramatic improvement to the present conditions. Thank you for considering our request. If you have any questions or concerns, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. I can be reached at 651-393-6247 (work), 651-455-6001 (home) or 651-338-3945 (cell). Sincer ly, Greg pr nger Presid m October 6, 2004 Gregg Springer Mendota Heights Athletic Association Fax # 686-9191 City of Mendota Heights Attached is my memo for the Parks and Recreation Commission agenda for next Tuesday's meeting which begins at 6:30 pm. If you do not agree with my recommendation, (suggest that you or your baseball commissioner attend this meeting to further discuss your request with the Parks and Recreation Commission. I101 Vectoria Curve •Mendota Heights, MN 55118 (651) 452-1850 •FAX (651) 452-8940 City of Mendota Heights K. October 7, 2004 Memo to: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Guy Kullander, Operations &Projects Coordinator,,`, Subject: Status of Special Park Fund Background: In August I reported to the Commission that funding available in the Special Park Fund for capital improvements was approximately $340,000,00 This week I asked for verification of this amount from the City Finance Director and was informed that the amount given to me in August was in error and that $38,000.00 in dedication fees from Town Center developments had been moved into a dedicated fund to pay for future trail, landscape and park amenities that will be constructed in the Town Center development in the next couple of years. Current balance of the Special Park Fund is approximately $300,000.00. Discussion: The City Council asked staff to inform the Commission that they did not intend to suggest that the Commission "spend down" the entire Special Park Fund, only that they did not see the need at this time to identify in the 2005 City Budget an alternate source of revenue to off -set the decline in park dedication fees generated by single family lot developments. The Parks Commission has identified and scheduled several capital improvement projects for completion in 2005 with working budgets totaling $116,000,00. If the Commission moves forward on the current schedule, following Council approval, the balance in the Special Park Fund in December 2005 is estimated to be $200,000.00. Recommendation: I recommend that planning efforts for the scheduled 2005 projects continue and that upon completion of final plans and bid estimates the Commission re-evaluate each project and determine if they desire to submit the projects to City Council for review and authorization to advertise for bids. City of Mendota Heights MEMORANDUM October 7, 2004 Memo to: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Guy Kullander, Operations & Projects Manager Regarding: Updates of Engineering Projects that include Trail Segments Lexington Avenue Bike Trail (Wagon Wheel Trail to Mendota Heights Road) Bibs will be open on Wednesday October 13tn, subject to sign -off by MnDOT. If MnDOT approvals are not received by that date the bid opening will be delayed an additional week or two. If bids are opened on October 13th and meet the Engineers Estimate, Council will be asked to award the contract on October 1 gtn if weather allows this trail segment may still be constructed this fall. 2. Emerson Avenue On -Street Trail (Dodd Road to Delaware Avenue) Emerson roadbed has been reconstructed, concrete curb/gutter was installed last week and the first lift of asphalt will be placed this fall. There are no plans to apply the paint stripe markings this fall. Following the second lift of asphalt next year the on -street paint stripe for the trail will be applied. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Date: October 1, 2004 To: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION From: TERESA GANGELHOFF RE: SEPTEMBER 2004 PARKS AND RECREATION REPORT Youth Trips Fall MEA Schools out trips are in place. The flyer will go out to schools the first week in October and is also published in the Heights Highlites. I met with WSP and SSP this month to go over winter break trips and settle the bus and trip accounts for the summer. Last Performance in the Park Held We held our last Performance in the Park at Mendakota Park on September 1, with music by the Paul Heffron Band. Thompson Park Activity Center provided root beer floats. Over 150 seniors attended. We made a small dance floor under the pavilion and many enjoyed dancing to all the great oldies. 55+ Senior Group I attended the last trip I planned with the senior groups of MH, and WSP to the Old Log Theater. I am now turning over senior activities and planning to Barb Eschle at Thompson Park Senior Center in WSP. We will continue to do the Performance in the Park together with the Paul Heffron band as that was so well attended. If I see a need in the future to try and start something again I will but for now most our MH seniors are already utilizing the center. I will put contact information for our seniors in each Heights Highlites so they may contact Barb and the center for activities. Ice Rinks An ad went into the Heights Highlites and a memo went out to the local High Schools for the hiring of rink attendants. A letter also went out to last years workers to see if they are interested in working again and they will be hired back first. At this time I am planning on all three rinks being open until the commission lets me know different. I would like to know as soon as possible as I will need to get workers hired during November. I have included a memo on past rink usage as requested by the park commissioners at the September meeting. These date back only to the years I have been employed. Skating Lessons Rebecca Rehn will be returning as our skating instructor this January at Friendly Hills Rink. Last year all her classes filled except adult lessons. We were able to take the waiting list and use the adult class time for an additional youth lesson. 6 week lessons are planned again for the first 6 week after the first of the year. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO September 14, 2004 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Teresa Gangelhoff —Recreation Programmer SUBJECT: Ice Rink Usage for past 3 seasons DISCUSSION: Attached are memos for the past three seasons with the numbers for ice rink usage. The first season I have reports on (2001/2002). The rinks were only open 27 days compared to the next two years when the rinks were opened at least 60 or more days. The first season the counts were taken every two hours and the next two seasons the counts were taken every hour. The first season the ice was in very poor condition due to weather and Terry from Public Works commenting that this was the worst he has seen in all his years working here. The next season the ice was not in that great of shape due again to weather but we tried to keep open as we had interest in boot hockey even if the ice was bumpy it was used. This past season was the highest usage as the weather cooperated and made for great ice conditions and skating. This attracted more skaters and we also had several groups come in for skating parties and 2 youth hockey groups came in for practices. We also filled our sessions of skating lessons offered on Saturdays and added additional sessions with 32 children and their parents participating. ACTION REQUIRED: This information was requested to compare the last few years of rink usage. I would like to suggest keeping open all three parks. They have been well staffed and we are open hours that fit the school schedules. Rink attendants are required to go out and take counts hourly and check on the skaters. Most of our attendants like to stay out on the ice with the kids and also help the kids with skate lacing. We have a separate flood crew that Terry hires and they work after hours. If rinks are closed it is only because of poor ice/weather conditions and that information is always on the hotline number that is posted at rinks and in the Heights Highlites. Each rink has a big sign posted on the outside with rink hours and numbers to call for further information. As supervisor over the rinks I feel that the rinks are put to good use and that use depends on the weather. The parks crew does a great job keeping the rinks clean and in working order. I feel that we should continue to support these three rinks. Kids need exercise and activity more than anything these days. If we take one or more of these rinks out many of these kids will not have access to skating and we will take away from providing them with after school physical activity. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO March 15, 2004 TO: Parks and Rec Commission FROM: Teresa Gangelhoff —Recreation Programmer SUBJECT: Ice Rink Usage for 2003/04 season DISCUSSION: Here are the dates the ice rinks were opened this past season: The rinks opened on December 17, 2003 and officially closed on February 20a'. We were open a total of 62 days. We closed 4 days because of below 0 temperatures. Adduig up the logs of skaters (counted on the hour) and combined both hockey and pleasure rink totals we had: 1985 skaters in 62 days used Marie Park 1763 skaters in 62 days used Friendly Hills 1687 skaters in 62 days used Wentworth The usage went up more this year because the weather was much better than the past two years. We may have been open only 2 days longer this year but the ice conditions were poor last year because of the changing weather but we tried to keep them open as much as possible even if the ice was only good enough ice for boot hockey. This year the weather remained at a temperature that kept the ice in great condition. Terry and his crew did a fantastic job keeping the ice rinks in great shape. I feel that this and cooperating weather had attracted more skaters this season. We also had several groups come in for skating parties and 2 youth hockey groups came several Tuesdays and Thursdays for hockey practice from 6-7 at Friendly Hills. We also had 32 children every Saturday with their parents attending skating lessons at Friendly Hills. Action Required: This is an information item only and I have attached the past two years rink usage reports so that you may compare them. (The 2002 report included counts that were taken every two hours, the 2003 and 2004 counts were taken hourly.) I also have included a copy of the Daily Log that we have used the past two years, if you would like to change anything on it for next season please let me know. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO April 1, 2003 TO: Parks and Rec Commission FROM: Teresa Gangelhoff -Recreation Programmer SUBJECT: Ice Rink Usage for 2002/03 season The rinks opened on December 27th, 2002 and officially closed on March 2, 2003. We were open a total of 60 days and closed down 6 days due to poor weather/ice conditions. We tried to stay open as much as possible as kids want to at least play boot hockey when the ice is to bumpy to skate. Adding up the logs of skaters (counted on the hour) we had: MARIE: 1110 hockey 354 Pleasure rink 1464 total WENTWORTH: 793 Hockey 105 Pleasure 898 total FRIENDLY HILLS: 768 Hockey 113 Pleasure 881 total This was not a very good year for skating and Terry and his crew did their best trying to keep the ice in good skating condition. The weather did not always cooperate. This years numbers were up from last year but last year the weather was even warmer and we were closed more often. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS November 27, 2002 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Teresa Gangelhoff —Recreation Programmer SUBJECT: Ice Rink Usage Both the City Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission have asked about ice rink usage. Here are the dates the ice rinks were opened last year. In talking with Terry Blum who has worked here over 25 years noted that this past winter was the worst for ice so it was a shorter season than usual. The rinks opened on January 5a'' They were open 22 of the 27 days. They were open 8 days in February. The rinks officially closed on February 1 I cn All three rinks were opened a total of 30 days last season. Adding up the logs of skaters we had: 634 skaters in 30 days used Marie Park 591 skaters in 30 days used Friendly Hills 447 skaters in 30 days used Wentworth Counts were taken every 2 hours, This coming season I have changed to getting counts every hour and can break it down to pleasure skating or hockey rink usage. Attached is a copy of the new form we will be using. I feel that last year was not a good year to base rink usage on Action Required: This is an information item only. This information will also be provided to the Parks and Recreation Commission at their January meeting. MIN SEE HpRR )00000 ME wi'IH US VL ►MYSTERY & oGVVAX FOR ►M &THE )►- - THE IMN Zp0 M.E.A THURSDAY, OCTOBER 21 MINNESOTA ZOO, MONORAIL.RIDE with HARRY POTTER and The Prisoner of Azkaban [MAX EXPERIENCE —Come discover the MN Zoo as we visit the Tropics Trail, Discovery Bay, Family Farm and we will see Harry Pnfter & the Prisoner of Azkaban IMAX Experience. Bring your own I unch and spending money. G9001%., BUS DEPARTSIRETURNS 9:20/4:55 AGE: 6-12 YEARS COST: $22.50 CHR/STMAS BREAK, TUESDAY, DEC. 28 BOWLING, LUNCH AND A MOVIE First we will start the day with 2 hours of bowling (includes shoes & bumper lanes if needed) at Wells Lanes in SSP. After Bowling we will stay for pizza & pop then were off to Showplace 16 for a g or PG rated movie (movies are not advertised until one week prior -you will 2 or 3 choices at the theater) Bring extra money for snacks BUS DEPARTSIRETURNS 9:1013:15 (APPROXIMATE -we will let kids call ast we depart theater as it will depend onVIC- movie ending time.) AGE: 6=12 COST: $20.00 pT M.E.A. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 22 GRAND RIOS INDOOR WATER PARK Come spend the day experiencing all the twists and turns at MN largest indoor water park, or just drift on the lazy river. Lunch is included (pizza/pop) You may bring extra spending money for snacks and arcade center BUS DEPARTSIRETURNS 9:05/3:55 AGE: 7-12 YEARS COST: $29.00 CHRISTMAS BREAK, THURSDAY DEC. 30 MAPLE GROVE INDOOR WATER PARK AND MAPLE MAZE INDOOR PLAYGROUND is trip provides fun in and out of the water, des, climbing levels,ball pits i playhouse, ng a bag lunch (and money for snacks) er lunch were off to the pool with 30 foot waterslide, sprays, geysers, rope DEPARTSIRETURNS ES: 6=12 YEARS r'- • r0 N.&WED. DEC. 27&29 FLOATS &FLICKS @ CENT RAL SQUARE COMMUNITY CENTER, S0. ST. PAUL Take in a movie while you swim! Stretch out on one of our fun floats or grab a noodle and enjoy the show. Movie will be rated G or PG (titles available 1 week prior) call SSP Parks for more info and directions @ 651-306-3690 COST: $3.00 TIME: 12:30-2:30 MENDOTA HEIGHTS POLICE DEPARTMENT CIDENT SUMMARIES - PARKS CN: 04003021 OFFENSE/INCIDENT: Arson/Portable Toilet DATE: 09/05/2004 22:55:0 OFFICER: Vonfeldt, J 2239 LOCATION: Valley Park 10-07-2004 SYNOPSIS: Responded to location on portable toilet on fire. I found the toilet had been burned down to the base. I put out the remainder of the fire with my extinguisher. No suspects found or cause of the fire. Owner of toilet is Nature Calls. 651/454-4441. CN: 04003181 OFFENSE/INCIDENT: Noise Complaint DATE: 09/18/2004 22:17:03 OFFICER: Rosse, T 2237 LOCATION: Marie Park SYNOPSIS: Responded to Marie Park on loud juveniles and cars coming and going. On arrival, there was no one in the park, and no vehicles in the area, CN: 04003288 OFFENSE/INCIDENT: DOB's DATE: 09/26/2004 09:11:Or OFFICER: Anderson, D 2204 ,CATION: Valley Park SYNOPSIS: An off --duty officer called the dispatcher to report that he observed underage drinking near the bridge in Valley Park. On arrival, there were no vehicles in the lot, and in conversation with ajogger, she observed no activity on the trail from Hwy 13. On enjoying my morning coffee at the picnic table, I heard no activity in the area. Status: UTL/GOA CN: 04003302 OFFENSE/INCIDENT: Theft from/Damage to Auto DATE: 09/27/2004 18:07:01 OFFICER: Petersen, E 2235 LOCATION: Scenic Overlook SYNOPSIS: Victim had vehicle parked in the lot at the above location, when an unknown suspect smashed out the driver's window and stole her purse with contents. Victim was provided a description and license plate number by a passerby. Victim given business card with case number. SEE DICTATED NARRATIVE. Refer to Investigations, CN: 04003323 OFFENSE/INCIDENT: Dog at Large DATE: 09/29/2004 15:24:Or OFFICER: Petersen, E 2235 )CATION: Valley Park SYNOPSIS: Caller reported a large white and black dog running at large at the above location. Dog was located but I was unable to catch the dog.