Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 08-20 Mtg Notes - Outdoor Rec Complex COMMUNITY MEETING OUTDOOR RECREATION COMPLEX Meeting Notes August 20, 2007 DRAFT Staff Present: City Adminisrrator Jamie Verbrugge,Parks and Recreation Director Dan Schultz, Parks Supervisor Tom Schuster,and Recording Secretary Sonja Honl Council � Commission Members Present: Mayor Bill Droste,City Council Member Mike Baxter,Parks&Recrearion Commission Members Maureen Bartz,Mike Eliason and Sandy Knight Others Present: Residents and stakeholder groups interested in the athletic complex. Schultz began the meeting at 8:00 p.m. Schultz asked those present to introduce themselves. He informed those in attendance that all of the fields shown in the plans are to be lit,as well as the tennis courts,as this allows more use of all of the facilities. He then began his power point presentation. He gave a brief review of the complex. It is 57 acres that were donated by Flint Hills Resources. Three requirements were specified by Flint Hills Resources for the use of the property: it must be used for a public park,Flint Hills has naming rights, (we cannot allow any other petroleum company naming rights),and we cannot sell or transfer the property without their permission. Schultz went on to explain that there are overhead power line easements running over the east side of the property and there are some restrictions due to this. Our goal is to try to meet the needs of the entire communitp. The benefits to businesses that will result from being able to host tournaments are being considered,and we are also keeping in mind how to make the best use of our egisting facilities in conjunction with the building of this complex. Schultz reviewed population data that showed the 2007 population at 22,161 and a projected population for 2030 of 45,498. This projection does not include the possible UMORE residential development. Over the last few months staff have had meetings with RA1�,Dakota Rev,residents/neighbors,other interested parties including Dakota County Technical College,the Parks and Recreation Commission (responsible for much of the guiding of the plan) and the City Council,to discuss needs. There is no set agenda as to the size or number of fields and we are flexible as to what we are going to do. The purpose of tonight's meeting is to get feedback from those in attendance and find out the needs of each group. Some items that have been discussed that the athletic compleg should provide are: multipurpose and flexibility,lights,site amenities such as shade, concessions and sun shelters,and the ability to host tournaments. Schultz reviewed the facilities and parking pros and cons for each of the five plans and explained that our goal is to come up with a plan that can be as multipurpose as possible. Matt Kearney asked about the preliminary cost estimate. Per Schultz,it is approaimately$6,000,000. This includes approximately$400,000 for landscaping. We asked the landscape architect to be conservatively high in including facilities as we can always cut back on things based on available funding. One of the meeting attendees stated that it is exciting to see tennis courts included,but six courts would not be enough for tournaments. Eight courts would be the minimum needed. Jon Adams,a representative from RAAA,stated that there were three main items they would like to focus on: green space-at least four fields;baseball and softball are lacking two adult size fields and one youth field;and they wanted to strongly encourage using lights which would be like having two fields. They also said that the multiuse field sizes would hurt them as far as tournaments. Schultz asked for more details about what size fields they would like. They would like to see a traveling softball size field for girls ages 10+ and 10 and 11 year old boys, fields for 12 to 13 year old boys,and fields for those ages 14 to adult. If the fields are shortened,you can add another Celd and more green space. Only adult softball would use 310'fences. Schultz stated that there are some challenges due to the topography and there are elevation differences between the fields. The plans had included 310'fences to accommodate adult play. A representative from soccer,lacrosse and football stated that the soccer teams are practicing on the outfields of ball fields now and pointed out on the plan where fields could be added. Knight stated that when talking to homeowners at the July Commission meeting,they had discussed flipping plan 3A as their front yard is 100'from the complex. The soccer fields would then be moved south. Per Schultz we would need netting but the architect thinks this would work. Krught liked the plan with the mirror image change. - 1 - COMMUNITY MEETING OUTDOOR RECREATION COMPLEX Meeting Notes August 20, 2007 Brian Fahey-Bleick,representing soccer,stated that soccer runs July—August,and has 1100 participants in the in-house program and 80 teams. If traveling soccer is included,there are 200 more participants. He was begging for green space dedicated to soccer. With lacrosse and football and soccer,he asked that the plan not stop at four fields. He also asked whether they could get some 200'fields. They need some midsized fields. As far as tennis,he suggested that tennis courts could be added to another park closer to residential areas in Rosemount. Tournaments in Apple Valley have drawn 2G0 teams and this number could approach 280. He aga.in stated that they are begging for green space. Trails and the other things are nice,but they just need green space. Eastview has their fields positioned diagonally and it doubled the green space. He asked if our landscape architect could redraw the plans. It was asked if the Commission has looked into the number of Rosemount residents who participate in football, soccer and lacrosse,and if there are more participants in one sport than another,how to best accommodate the most residents. Per Schultz,RAAA serves the Rosemount High School attendance area and we are looking into this and trying to be as fair and equitable as possible. We have had discussions as to the actual capacity for use of fields. Some communities such as Woodbury and Apple Valley play on Saturdays and we could do that. Some communities such as Apple Valley have two baseball games a night on one field,if there is enough parking. We need to look at all available opportunities for use of fields. Schultz also stated that we will be looking at the number of participants and that we want to be sure that we have accurate numbers. The Parks and Recreation staff could also talk with other cities regarding equitable availability of fields to groups based on users. Knight mentioned that Valley Park residents have Rosemount zip codes. It was asked if lights could be added to e�sting city parks to double the field usage. I{night and others said that if lights were added to these parks,the lights would be shining in residents'backyards and they would not be happy. Knight said that we need to talk to the landscape architect regarding the tennis courts. Eagan has nicely designed tiered courts behind the high school and if we could break up the tennis courts in the plans,it might allow for another soccer field. Another person said that it was exciting to know that tennis courts are being included,and they allow three seasons of play for people of all ages. Another person said that tennis is unique in the only a maximum of four players can participate at a time on a court and they have 75 participants in their program. T'he representative from soccer,lacrosse and football asked about the possibility of using artificial turf on one of the fields. Per Schultz,we have talked about this and will look at it more when we start budgeting. We have to keep in mind that we still don't know how the complex will be paid for. The turf could be a big benefit for early and late season play. It was asked if tennis courts are the most e�ensive thing to build and whether they could be added to Japcee Park. Per Schultz,they might be able to add them to Jaycee Park. We have discussed adding more courts to Charlies Park so we would have four courts there. Kearney asked about the best guess on timing of the complex. Per Schultz,there has been discussion about going out for bond referendum next spring. First,we need to come up with a layout we can agree on and look at shifting some other facilities at other parks. One person mentioned that a spring bond means it would be useable in 2010. Schultz stated that a majoriry of the work could be done next summer. Someone asked if there were funds available now for the compleg. Per Schultz,there is $2,000,000 in the parks improvement fund and we have discussed doing some work at the site this fall. A couple of people stated that there are several newer fields where the parking lots haven't been paved (in St. Croi�c and Lakeville). Another person mentioned that as far as tournaments,two concession areas work better than one. This is where the groups make money at tournaments. The concession stands don't have to be full service. It was asked if there was only one entrance in plan 3a,and that another entrance would be helpful for traffic flow. Per Schultz,the county will only allow one entrance on county roads. Many athletic compleges only have one entrance. - 2 - COMMUNITY MEETING OUTDOOR RECREATION COMPLEX Meeting Notes August 20, 2007 Another person mentioned that if we did something with the tennis courts similar to what Eagan has done,it would be easier to host a tennis tournament. Spreading the tournament out around town would make it difficult to organize an event. Eagan's facility is beautiful and maybe the different levels would work at our site. Jon Adams stated that lighting adds a field,but what we are looking at right now for the athletic compleg barely catches them up. It would get the traveling baseball and softball teams off of the in-house space,Shannon Park could become an in-house site,and R.AAA would not have to overlap seasons. He also said that by 2010 we will be short green space and baseball fields. Fahey-Bleick agreed,and said that Apple Valley as 30 dedicated soccer fields,while Rosemount,with half the population of Apple Valley,has only five. He stressed again the need for as much green space as possible and asked that the architect redraw the plan,twisting things around to ga.in as much green space as possible from the space we have. Adams asked that the aesthetics,walking paths,etc.,be pushed down (people will not be out there to walk) and to include as many fields as possible. I{night asked Schultz to give the group an update on other opportunities being discussed. Per Schultz,sta.ff has met with District 917 regarding a new school they are building by the old county shop east of Community of Hope Church. There is an opportunity to pa.rtner with them for one baseball field. Staff is also talking with St. Joseph's School representatives who are proposing to build fields along with a new school. At this time,they are waiting for the school to be built. Schultz informed the group that Dakota County Technical College has talked about adding three soccer fields to their property and had plans drawn up for this three years ago. There will also be a new park built in the Arcon Development and we will ha�e parkland for some fields there. It was asked whether a sheet of ice could be added to the athletic compleg. Per Schultz,that would not be possible. Another person asked if District 196 has any plans to build another school in Rosemount. Per Schultz,staff has talked with the school district and there are no plans now,but if the UMORE development proceeds and we develop the area,east of Hwy 52,they might need to consider this. There was a question from the audience as to what LTMORE is. Schultz explained that UMORE is 3,000 acres owned by the University of Minnesota,and the University is looking into creating a residential development there. Knight is on the UMORE planning committee and explained that UMORE is moving forward with the plan,but they need to do a sizeable clean up of the munitions site on the property. They are doing soil sampling to see what is in the soil and are getting development plans for a planned community. Another person asked whether a swimming compleg had been looked at for the site. Per Schultz,it has been discussed,but it didn't fit with this site. Other property has been identified where it might fit better. Sta,ff is still in discussions with the owner of the 21 acre triangle property south of the athletic complex site for recreation facilities. The shape of this property restricts its use somewhat. Staff will talk about this neat Wednesday with the Ciry Council. Schultz mentioned that at the Parks Commission meeting negt Monday we will talk about the feedback we've received,and tweaking and redrawing the plans. We will meet again,agree on a plan,bring it to the City Council, and then talk about financing for the complex. This concluded the meeting. - 3 -