Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/20/1990 � . - • • CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PARKS ANB RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE November 20, 1990 � Minutes of the Apple Valley Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee held November 20, 1990, at the Apple Valley Community Center. PRESENT: Chairperson Greg Kopischke; Committee Members Tina Rankin, David Gross, Russ DeFauw, John DiRico (arrived at 7:35pm>, Charlie Maus (arrived at 7:45pm); Parks and Recreation Director Randy Johnson; Associate Planner Meg McMonigal; Valley Athletic Association Representatives Roger Tadsen and Lynda Holmen. ABSENT: No One Item #1. Chairman Kopischke called the meeting to order at 7:10 pm. Item #2. Approval of the Agenda. Request to add Meg McMonigal's information on Development Fees Comparison. MOTION: by David Gross, seconded by Tina Rankin to approve the agenda with the added item. VOTE: Yes - 4, No - 0 Item #3. Approval of October Minutes. MOTION: by Tina Rankin, seconded by Russ DeFauw to accept the October minutes as written. VOTE: Yes - 4, No - 0 Randy Johnson requested the discussion be moved to "Old Business" because Roger Tadsen had not arrived yet. � Item #S.B. OId Business - Soccer Field Construction Update Randy Johnson gave an update on the four new soccer fields constructed this fall. Most of the money expended for this project has already been deducted from the park dedication fund. The fund balance will drop to approximately $490,000, but will return to the $500,400 balance by spring. 1 • • ` . Lynda Holmen, representing the Valley Athletic Association (VAA) , asked if there would be any extra care involved with these new fields. Randy Johnson statad that he had already spoken with Roger Tadsen about staying off the fields for this year. Signs will be posted on site and a patrol will do periodic checks of the parks. Someone from the Parks and Recreation Department will speak to the VAA coaches at one of their organizational meetings also. David Gross asked if it would be acceptable to send a "thank you" Zetter to Tom Wahl for his part in completing the soccer field construction projects on time and with a $50,000 savings to the park dedication fund. MOTION: by David Gross, seconded by Greg Kopischke to send a Ietter to Tom Wahl as a thank you for the timely and professional completion of the new soccer fields at Huntington, MoelZer, Tintah and Valley Middle parks. VOTE: Yes - 6, No - Q Randy 3ohnson assured the Committee that a letter would be very much appreciated. It will be drafted for the Parks and Recreation Advisary Committee's approval at next month's meeting. Item #S.C. Old Business - Park Dedication Fund Balance as of October 31, 1990 _ $531,806.00. City Council adopted the $20,000 benchmark fee for park dedication at their last meeting. Meg McMonigal will do another projection for next year as far as building permits. The number of permits seems to be staying nearly level despite the talk of a slump. Ms. McMonigal handed out an informational sheet on the comparison of development fees. The information was compiled in April of 1990. A1Z of the cities interviewed do collect park dedication fees for commercial building permits, but at various rates. The report does not reflect the fees collected after the City Council approved the charging of the commercial/industrial park dedication fees last spring. There has been some major commercial projects since that time. Over the next ten years as building sites decrease, this fund , will go down. There was some discussion as to the different land values comparing commercial and industrial to residential. Randy Johnson stated that in January the City Council will again have it's annual goal setting session. That may be an appropriate time to bring up the possible increase in Iand values for industrial. 2 . ' , ' • • Bavid Gross asked Ms. McMonigal to provide a contemporary comparison survey of some of the different metro communities showing the variations between residential, commercial and industrial fees. She agreed to check into such a survey. � Item #S.A. Southern Athletic Complex Discussion Randy Johnson distributed a copy of a rough sketch depicting the southern athletic complex. It is not drawn to scale, but intended to show what could possibly be included in such a eomplex. The complex would be located between the Target Greatland and the Menards. The City is investigating the purchase options for 60 acres of land to be developed into mu2ti purpose playing fields for a cost of about a million dollars. The fence on the softball field would be a semi- permanent fixture to be taken down/put up by the maintenance crews. There is a one milZion dollar contingency fund that could be tapped into to get the project started without going to a vote. If the issue goes to a vote, some of the amenities may be changed. The cost of adding an ice arena would probably double the cost. The entire project as shown on the sketch would possibly be a two year project to include lights and irrigation. Russ DeFauw stated that he believes all the App1e Valley Hockey Association is looking for in the way of an arena wouZd be a roof and some heat, bare bones concept. A hockey bubble would cost about $350,000 to purchase. In Randy Johnson's experience, the bubble would be used four months out of the year for eight to ten years. It wouZd never be a money making venture; it would always need to be subsidized. Mr. Johnson suggested that the best solution to a new arena would be to build adjacent to the current sports arena, Tina Rankin stated that it is important to get the land first and then work from there. Mr. Gross commented that when the final design decisions are made, it would be beneficial to have some input from the various groups that would be uszng the playfields. Several questions were raised by the Committee as to the financing of the athletic complex facilities, i.e. is the school district interested in buying-out the City's ownership of the sports arena; would a 1/2 million dollar bond issue be considered; can we approach the Target Greatland store for sponsorship? Tom Goodwin and Tom Melena will be invited to the December meeting to �I discuss the project work up, cost, money, etc. '' 3 • • . Item #4.A. New Business - VAA Representatives Chairman Kopischke sta�ed that the issue of a user fee is not an imminent fact. It is just one of the options being considered. It`s a small portion of the Parks and Recreation fund. Technically the department is working on the 1989 budget in 1991. Things may have to be trimmed or cut down in the future. The Committee wants to keep the good working relationship between the youth athletic programs and the Parks and Recreation Department. Roger Tadsen stated that the concern is to keep communications open from both sides. They've had some dealings with Randy Johnson and a couple of the Committee members, but there are no formal communications between the two groups. Mr. Tadsen also stated that they as community members want to make sure that the "pie" is divided between all of the children. They need to let the City Council know the needs of the community. The Apple Valley Community Center was built with a bond issue that VAA members helped to pass. Roger Tadsen now feels that the VAA children ii are not allowed full use of the facility. Tina Rankin replied that the Apple Valley Community Center and Eastview Athletic Complex were built to move the revenue producing adult athletic programs out of the schools, thereby leaving the schools available to the youth groups. Roger Tadsen said the VAA offers programs to everyone who comes to them. If it comes to the programs being cost prohibitive because of added user fees, he has a problem with that. Currently the VAA does a scholarship program that comes from their general fund account. Money is taken from the general fund and directed into the specific sport program that offers the scholarship. He distributed an informational sheet showing the n ber of participants in softball, soccer and baseball. Overall total was 4,387 for these sports. I Russ DeFauw explained the user fee as $1.50 per play�r in each sport as $7,500. That could translate into two part-time maintenance persons for mowing, etc. . That way the user fee would directly go back into the VAA programs dollar for dollar. 4 , � • . ` Roger Tadsen pointed out that VAA has been working to help cut back on the cost incurred by the maintenance department by having volunteers doing various projects. . Lynda Holmen questioned whether the children would be using the southern athletic complex. Randy Johnson assured her that it would be built with the youth groups in mind, whereas Eastview was built with adult use in mind. Mr. Johnson then went on to explain that if there was a user fee implemented, everyone would be accessed at the same rate. The department does not need the user fee for 1491, but the current budget does not allow for any growth. The department needs to generate money somehow, cut programs or implement a user fee program. David Gross stated that the user fee would not take the plaee of the current volttnteer programs. There was some discussion on how other cities operate. Most of them work with a combination of volunteers and city employees. In St. Louis Park the recreation department handles all of the youth sports. The maintenance was comparable to Apple Valley's. Russ DeFattw pointed out that other cities may have a whole different set of problems/standards. They are not all faced with the growing population as Apple Valley is. Any new fields added need to be maintained and if $10,000 or $7,500 is raised, that would be extra. Randy Johnson mentioned that there is a task force in Apple Valley that is investigating the use of a franchise fee for anyone that operates within the city. City Council would probably create a separate authority to contral the funds. Cable TV is the only one currently paying franchise fees. Roger Tadsen then questioned the availability of certain pieces of property in the city for youth playing fields. It was suggested that he go directly to the property owners. The possibility of city maintenance crews working to maintain a field on private property with the owner's consent and if there were enough personnel to do so was also discussed. Randy Johnson stated that at the next quarterly meeting with the school district, he would like the VAA and RAA� (Rosemount Area Athletic Association) to attend. John DiRico wanted to go on record as being opposed to the implementation of a user fee. He is not convinced that it would be the answer. Operating in a time of inflation with prices going up it would be a slap in the face to add a user fee on a child to participate in a sports program. He also feels that it would be a waste of time for the amount of money involved. City Council could be approached for another $50,000 if needed. 5 • • " . Chairman Kopischke summarized the issue by saying the .Committee's number one priority is to work with staff within the approved budget. Right now he sees nothing immznent as far as a user fee and VAA. That will have to be cros§ed when they come to it. There are different opinions even on the board. Roger Tadsen asked to receive a copy of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee minutes each month. He will inturn send a copy of the VAA minutes to Randy Johnson. Item #6. Other The next Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting will be scheduled for Tuesday, December 18, 1990. David Gross will be out of town and unable to attend. Randy 3ohnson distributed a copy of the "Good News" information that ' will be mailed to the City Council and Advisory Committee on a regular !, basis. It is meant to inform them of some of the successful programs � offered by the Parks and Recreation Department. Item #7. Adjourn MOTION: by Tina Rankin, seconded by David Gross to adjourn the meeting at 9:OOpm. VOTE: Yes - 6, No - 0 6