HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.17.06 Work Session Minutes
Council Workshop
Minutes
May 17, 2006
Mayor Soderberg called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Vice Chair Neal called the meeting to order for the Parks & Recreation Commission at 6:00 p.m.
Present: Soderberg, Fogarty, Pritzlaff, Wilson
Oswald, Hansen, Johnson, Neal
Also Present: Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation
Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant
MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to approve the agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
The Parks and Recreation Commission wanted to review the facility needs study and obtain
direction from the Council whether to proceed with re-prioritizing a Community Center or look
at other needs for park and recreation facilities. A community focus group was formed and five
priorities were identified for recreational facilities:
1. Community Center
2. Sports Complexes - one for youth and one for adults
3. Land acquisitions
4. Indoor Gymnasium
5. llrails
The three key recommendations were:
1. Prepare a parks and recreation system plan.
2. Feasibility study of a community center
3. Prepare a comprehensive funding and partnership strategy which included land
acquisition
The Council agreed to move forward with a community center study which was completed.
Council recently voted to not consider a community center referendum.
The land acquisition laid out acquiring land for a community center, a couple sports complexes,
and future community parks. Some of the acquisitions occur through the park dedication
process. The other part of the acquisition is under funding and whether the City wants to go out
for referendum to allocate funds to acquire key parcels of land that could be acquired adjacent to
existing parks or acquired for future community parks. The Parks and Recreation Commission
wanted to get a sense from the Council as to where they are with the recreational facility needs
study and should the commission continue to work on this, knowing decisions need to be made
regarding funding, and where we want to go with recreation facilities. The commission is
looking at a concept plan for Mystic Meadows. This was a key component for creating an adult
athletic complex, primarily softball fields. The commission is looking to master plan the area for
two 4-field complexes. The only part the commission has control of now is Mystic Meadows
Second Addition which is shown as a 4-field complex. The plan is when the Iola Harris property
to the east comes in for development, the opportunity would be available to acquire additional
land to create another 4- field complex. Then the adult complex needs would be met. As far as
the youth complex, there are 55 acres on the Newland property that was identified for a
CouncillPark & Rec Workshop Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 2
community center and youth athletic fields. The commission is working hard on a recreational
needs study and some actions are being taken and information gathered that will allow Council
to make some decisions.
Staff asked Council ifthere was an opportunity to re-prioritize a community center and scale
back the plan to address the gymnasium component. Mayor Soderberg stated the price tag the
way a community center was recommended breaks the bank. Council may need to determine an
acceptable budget. Councilmember Wilson asked if there was enough land identified for the
priorities. Staff replied through the park dedication process there will be enough.
Councilmember Wilson's concern was with having to release the land back to Newland. The site
location is conducive and central to the community for a community center. He felt the youth
complex and fields were a higher priority than the adult fields. He would like to look at a
partnership with the school as far as the youth complex. Councilmember Fogarty felt it had to be
100% disassociated from the school district. Right now the school district provides 80% of all
the fields. The City needs to start providing some of those fields and take responsibility and
ownership of that. Mayor Soderberg was not concerned with the 55 acre site going back to
Newland as they will have to provide park dedication. The work done on the map identifies
where the park will be and they have consented to that. We may need to determine an acceptable
dollar amount to put out on a referendum and use the money to build something. Parks and
Recreation Director Distad noted the City does not have a land acquisition cost, the land is part
of the park dedication and is a substantial savings on the cost of the project. That is the benefit
of having a systems plan in front of development. Whether the City has to bond for completion
of adult and youth outdoor athletic fields depends on the park development fee that comes in.
Mystic Meadows is also required to provide a park development fee, this would all be land,
approximately 30 acres or $300,000 - $500,000. Councilmember Pritzlaff agreed the price tag
was too high for the community center. However, he does not want to give out what dollar
amount will not break the City. He asked how many acres will be combined for Executive
Estates. Staff replied 15 acres.
Parks and Recreation Director Distad asked Council ifthe Community Center is a done deal or is
Council willing to have the commission look at the different spaces and bring back a different
proposal that would at least start a community center to build momentum for other phases.
Councilmember Pritzlaff stated the community center was presented at a school meeting and a
Council meeting. At the school meeting there were only 15 people that attended and showed an
interest and fewer at the Council meeting. He did not feel the community was there for the
presentations to show support. Councilmember Fogarty noted when this was sent to the task
force there was a lot of support. The survey had the highest results ever and a lot of it focused
around recreational facilities. Mayor Soderberg stated the community center site plan called for
an outdoor athletic complex as well as various amenities in the building. At this point, the
building is going to be cost prohibitive. If a budget can be established to do the outdoor athletics
for youth and Meadowview Park it might be doable.
City Administrator Herlofsky noted in looking at the recreation priorities he had a hard time
telling the difference between a community center, sports complex and indoor gymnasium and
field house. He liked the idea with the school district of trying to combine activities, but the
school is booked up with their activities. Councilmember Fogarty stated if the community center
is on hold through the next election cycle, she would like to see two complexes developed and
the 55-acre site developed with the intention ofthe community center being there, having it
designed, put in place, parking lots, etc. so that land can still be developed for the purpose we
Council/Park & Rec Workshop Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 3
hoped it would be used for. Staff stated the only issue with the Newland site is we do not own
any land up there. It depends on when they start developing the land and deeding it to the City.
Councilmember Fogarty asked ifit would be difficult to come up with numbers for a fall
referendum. Staff replied we could estimate, but if we are short do we build just part of it. He
felt the Park and Rec Commission needs to be involved in this process. Councilmember Fogarty
does not want a youth complex to wait four years to get started. She could see a community
center is an optional facility, but parks are not. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked if a referendum
would be for ball fields or would it go into the park and rec fund. He did not want to put money
from a referendum towards a boardwalk if we could not make it work with money from the
development. Chair Oswald noted the referendum would be for a specific use. Councilmember
Wilson agreed outdoor facilities and land is a higher priority than a community center. As far as
a community center he would eliminate the aquatics. Councilmember Fogarty agreed as long as
it was in phase two. He feels a community room would be a higher priority. Chair Oswald
asked if Council wanted the commission to come back with options on both types of facilities.
Councilmember Fogarty and Mayor Soderberg agreed with looking at options. City
Administrator Herlofsky noted whenever you set an amount you cannot go over, no one is happy
because no one gets entirely what they want. It is best to know what the costs are and work from
there. We should also know operating costs before we start and we need a business plan for that
facility once it is functioning. Councilmember Wilson felt it was too early for a community
center. He would be open to look at possibilities for an outdoor facility. Councilmember
Pritzlaffwas willing to look at options, but not use the dollar amount approach. Member Hanson
stated a community center could start with a meeting room, areas for walking or running, use for
programs, etc. and build on that.
(Councilrnember Fogarty left at 6:40 p.rn.)
Mayor Soderberg suggested developing a plan or phasing to keep the cost down and present it to
Council for review and then take it to the voters. Member Neal noted in the survey the number
one thing residents wanted was aquatics in the community center. Member Hanson felt they
need to create a space that is appealing and start from there. Staff felt part of the Economic
Development Plan should include recreational facilities. City Administrator Herlofsky suggested
putting more emphasis on a budget. Mayor Soderberg gave direction to the Park and Rec
Commission to come up with options for an outdoor facility and he also favored putting up some
type of building. Councilmember Pritzlaff suggested looking at fields, we cannot do fields and a
building. Parks and Recreation Director Distad suggested Council direct staff to come back with
an indoor option and an outdoor option. Council can then make a decision as to one or the other
or none. He agreed we cannot do both. Council agreed with this direction.
MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to adjourn at 6:57 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION by Neal, second by Johnson to adjourn at 6:57 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
:: )--v7~
ynthia Muller
Executive Assistant