Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.a. Request to Approve the Central Park Expansion StudyAGENDA ITEM: Request to approve the Central Park Expansion Study. AGENDA SECTION: New Business PREPARED BY: Eric Zweber, Senior Planner AGENDA NO. 61.0. ATTACHMENTS: Central Park Expansion Planning Study, Excerpt from the June 22 Parks and Recreation Meeting Minutes, June 22 E- Mail from LaVonne Woodruff. APPROVED BY: zoi RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the Central Park Expansion Planning Study. 4 ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL City Council Regular Meeting: August 3, 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND The City has been considering improving and /or expanding Central Park for a number of years. The expansion of the Central Park frontage and access is identified within the Development Framework for Downtown Rosimount (Framework), which was adopted in July 2004. The Framework identifies the importance of expanding the frontage and public access to Central Park, including the possible acquisition of Polfus Implement ar d the BP gas station. The City has applied for funding to expand the park numerous times, including 2004, 2005, and 2008 Livable Communities Demonstration Account grants. Last year, the City received a $20,000 planning grant from thL: Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) to develop the Central Park Expansion Planning Study (Central Park Study). The grant is a one to one match, meaning the City contributes $10,000 and the CDA contributes $10,000. Staff has prepared the Central Park Study and request that the City Council review and approve the Central Park Study. DISCUSSION The Central Park Study is comprised of six sections: the history of Central Park planning, major themes, current Central Park design, Central Park design alternatives, implementation, and next steps. For the purpose of this Executive Summary, staff will concentrate on the Central Park design alternatives and the public involvement process used to create the plan. The full color version of the Central Park Study has been provided!: within the City Councilmember's packets for review. Central Park Design Alternatives The City approached the design of the expansion of Central Park to include at least three scenarios. First, a scenario in which the City improves the property it currently owns. Second, the City explores the opportunities available if the City were to acquire the Polfus property in addition to the property it currently owns. Third, the City explores the opportunities available if the City were to acquire both the Polfus and the, BP properties in addition to the properties it currently owns. Alternative A :includes only the land that the City owns and shows the extension of the Interpretive Trail Corridor to 145 Street West and improvement to the landscaping within the park. Alternative B includes the City owned land and the Polfus property. In addition to the improvements in Alternative A, Alternative B realigns the Central Park /City Hall entrance to the Burma Avenue /145 Street intersection, adds a civic gathering space, and improves the community gardens. Alternatives C, D, and E all include the City owned land with both the Polfus and the BP properties. In addition to the improvements in Alternative B, Alternative C adds additional civic space, while Alternatives D and E include approximately 3,000 square feet of retail space. Tenants of the retail space are intended to be complementary to the functions within Central Park, such as a bike /skate /cross county ski rental shop or coffee /ice cream shop. The alternatives should not be looked at as mutually exclusive or that the City needs to pick one alternative to redevelop Central Park. The alternatives should be looked at as a maturing of the park over time. Alternative A can be developed currently by improving the land that the City currently own. Should there be an opportunity to purchase the Polfus property in the future, the City can explore expanding the park and redeveloping into Alternative B. Ultimately, if the City were able to acquire both the Polfus and the BP properties, the City can implement the ultimate development of Central Park by choosing to redevelop into Alternatives C, D, or E. The Central Park Study lays out a framework into which Central Park can grow into over time and as opportunities present themselves to the City. Public Involvement Process The public was involved in development of this Central Park Study through four elements: meeting with the potentially affected property owners, at a public open house, at Parks and Recreation Commission meetings, and at City Council meetings. City staff met with the business and land owners of the Polfus and BP properties on April 17, 2008 to inform them of the purpose of the Central Park Study and the City's desire to purchase their property if they were willing sellers. On January 13, 2009, City staff met with the business owners again to show them the design alternatives and gather any comments that they had for the City Council. The business owners had no specific comments regarding the park alternatives but informed staff of their future business plans. A public open house was held at City Hall on March 25, 2009. The open house was attended by several Downtown business owners, an owner of a condo at Rosemount Plaza, a representative from the Robert Trail Library, and a member of the local press. There were no significant comments received regarding the design alternatives, but there were questions asked regarding the funding available for the park expansion, where the Polfus and BP businesses would relocate if the properties were purchased, and the timing of the park expansion. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed and discussed the design alternatives on December 22, 2008 before the alternatives were shown to the business owners or at the open house. At that meeting the Parks Commission accepted the park alternatives for public input. On June 22, 2009, the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the draft Central Park Study and recommended that the City Council approve the Central Park Study. The City Council reviewed design alternatives at their January 14, 2009 work session. That review included updates on the meeting with property owners and the Parks and Recreation Commission discussion. At the conclusion of the discussion, the City Council directed staff to display the design alternatives at the public open house and gather input regarding the park alternatives. The Port Authority also reviewed the Central Park Study at their August 3rd meeting. Tonight, the City Council is asked to review and adopt the Central Park Expansion Planning Study. LaVonne WoodruffE -mail On June 22, LaVonne Woodruff provided an e -mail with a series of questions and comments regarding the Central Park Study. The full e -mail (edited to remove topics in the original e-mail that did not regard Central Park) is provided as an attachment to the Executive Summary Staff will address the questions and comments below that have not been addressed previously in this Executive Summary. 2 How much money will the entire project cost At what point does the study become a TO DO project? Is there an established timetable, with a completion date While staff could come up with an estimate of the cost of the project based on current assessed values, engineering costs, and equipment costs, neither of the property owners are currently a willing seller and it is unknown when or if they ever will be. As described above, the Central Park Study is evolutionary and the cost of the phases will be determined and evaluated as opportunities present themselves. Will any add'l project monies be available from the Trails /River people /projects As described in the implementation section of the study, staff will be applying for all grants that would apply towards this project and ask all relevant organization for funds to help facilitate the redevelopment of the park. Many of the grants available require that there is a City approved plan that describes the redevelopment of the park. Approving the Central Park Study will expand and improve the City's ability to access the grants and other funding for the park. There should also be more than 1 entrance /exit (for traffic control, as well as emergencies). Most parks the size of Central Park do not have more than one vehicular entrance. This allows the City to use the park as completely as possible and limits the potential for conflicts between park users, their equipment, and vehicles. There is more than one pedestrian entrances to Central Park and emergency vehicles could use those entrances if needed (through the trail behind Shamrock Animal Hospital or through the public works site). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Central Park Expansion Planning Study. 3 CENTRAL PARK EXPANSION PLANNING STUDY Central Park Lift 31aVon it# July, 2009 4 ROSEMOUNT SPIRIT OF PRIDE AND PROGRESS Acknowledgements City Council William Droste, Mayor Kim Shoe Corrigan Mike Baxter Mark DeBettignies Phillip Sterner Kurt Bills Jeff Weisensel Parks and Recreation Commission Mike Eliason, Chair Maureen Bartz Jason Eisold Sandra Knight Kevin Strayton Jonathan Nutzmann, Student Volunteer Rosemount City Staff Dwight Johnson, City Administrator Dan Schultz, Parks and Recreation Director Eric Zweber, Senior Planner Dakota County Community Development Agency The City would like to acknowledge and thank the Dakota County Community Development Agency for their Redevelopment Planning Grant that provided up to $10,000 in matching funds for the development of the Central Park Expansion Planning Study. 2 History of Central Park Planning Central Park is approximately 4.5 acres in size located in the middle of the block bounded by South Robert Trail, 145 Street West, and Brazil Avenue. Central Park does not have significant street frontage onto any of these streets with only two accesses, one onto South Robert Trail and one onto 145 Street West. The majority of the park visitors access the park through the shared City Hall and Central Park parking lot. Due to this configuration, many residents are unaware of the park even if they are driving down 145 Street West or South Robert Trail. For a number of years, the City has expressed an interest in expanding Central Park to provide more street access and more visual connection with the community and the Downtown specifically. The City first explored acquiring the Polfus and BP (Amoco, at the time) properties to expand Central Park in the Development Framework for Downtown Rosemount, which was adopted in July 2004. In 2008, the City received a $20,000 grant from the Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) to develop this Central Park Expansion Planning Study. The grant proposal stated that an expansion of Central Park will be evaluated to expand the parks function as a neighborhood park for Downtown and to serve community functions for the entire City. Public Involvement The public was involved in development of this Study through four elements; meeting with the potentially affected property owners, at a public open house, at Parks and Recreation Commission meetings, and at City Council meetings. City staff met with the business and land owners of the Polfus and BP properties on April 17, 2008 to inform them of the purpose of the Study and the City's desire to purchase their property if they were willing sellers. On January 13, 2009, City staff met with the business owners again to show them the design alternatives and gather any comments that they had for the City Council. The business owners had no specific comments regarding the park alternatives but informed staff of their future business plans. A public open house was held at City Hall on March 25, 2009. The open house was attended by several Downtown business owners, an owner of a condo at Rosemount Plaza, a representative from the Robert Trail Library, and a member of the local press. There were no significant comments received regarding the design alternatives, but there were questions asked regarding the funding available for the park expansion, where the Polfus and BP businesses would relocate if the properties were purchased, and the timing of the park expansion. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed and discussed the design alternatives on December 22, 2008 before the alternatives were shown to the business owners or at the open house. At that meeting the Parks Commission accepted the park alternatives for public input. On June 22, 2009, the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the draft Central Park Expansion Planning Study and recommended that the City Council approve the Study. 3 Community Festivals Central Park, along with the City Hall lawn and parking lot, serve as the major gathering place for Rosemount's annual festival, Leprechaun Days. The Leprechaun Days activities in Central Park include the bathtub races, the carnival rides, the terminus of the parade route, and the concert location through use of the existing band shell. The expanded Central Park designs should consider improvements that will benefit the Leprechaun Days activities and experience, as well as providing for other civic and cultural events Downtown. Central Park Facilities Central Park currently has a playground, a park shelter building, an amphitheater, two ice skating rinks, the first segment of the Rosemount Interpretive Trail Corridor (currently starting at the shelter building and running north along the Koch Trail), a veterans' memorial, and the community gardens. The layout of these facilities is shown on the Existing Conditions map (Figure 1). Consideration to update, realign, or refurbish these park amenities will be investigated during any Central Park expansion. It is also expected that new facilities will be considered to improve the park's function as a neighborhood park and community gathering space. 5 The Central Park designs should also consider spaces that are flexible in design to host a variety of events, such as art festivals, neighborhood and family gatherings, library or school sponsored activities, or other celebrations. Gateway to Downtown The ultimate expansion of Central Park would bring the park to the corner of 145 Street and South Robert Trail, the main intersection of Downtown. Having a public space such as Central Park located on one corner of this main intersection will emphasize the mixed use nature of Rosemount's vibrant Downtown; that includes residential, commercial, and civic space. The expanded Central Park will provide an opportunity for residents who normally may not visit Downtown or the community festivals with an opportunity to do so, and will also serve a gathering space for residents who do normally visit Downtown. In this way, Central Park will truly serve as a gateway to Downtown. Current Central Park Design Central Park is approximately 4.5 acres in size located in the middle of the block bounded by South Robert Trail, 145 Street West, and Brazil Avenue. The Central Park Expansion Planning Study intends to build upon the existing facilities at Central Park and Erickson Park, as well as consider the opportunities available if the Polfus and BP properties were acquired to enlarge Central Park. The City Council reviewed design alternatives at their January 14, 2009 work session. That review included updates on the meeting with property owners and the Parks and Recreation Commission discussion. At the conclusion of the discussion, the City Council directed staff to display the design alternatives at the public open house and gather input regarding the park alternatives. On August 3, 2009, the City Council reviewed and adopted the Central Park Expansion Planning Study. The Port Authority also reviewed the Plan at their August 3` meeting. Major Themes When looking to enlarge Central Park, the City has four themes that the expanded park is to include in its design: a trailhead for the Rosemount Interpretive Trail Corridor; a neighborhood park for downtown residents and workers; a gathering space to hold community festivals; and a gateway to Downtown. Rosemount Interpretive Trail Corridor The Rosemount Interpretive Trail Corridor, when fully constructed, is planned to connect Downtown Rosemount with the Mississippi River through a route that connects local residential neighborhoods with the unique environmental resources within Rosemount. Along the route, the Trail would connect with two regional trails, the Vermillion Highlands Greenway Regional Trail that will connect Lebanon Hills Park with Vermillion Highlands and the new Dakota County regional park; and the Mississippi River Regional Trail that will connect St. Paul with Hastings. The expanded Central Park will serve as the western trailhead for the Rosemount Interpretive Trail Corridor and all that it connects to. The City is also considering adding a small commercial space within the expanded Central Park. It is desired that services provided by the tenants of the commercial space be complementary to the users of the Trail, and the park. Neighborhood Park The Development Framework for Downtown Rosemount plans for additional residents and employees within Downtown, beginning with the 108 rental units and 13,000 square feet of commercial space in Waterford Commons. Central Park is expected to serve as a neighborhood park for the new residents and employees Erickson Park (directly north of Central Park) can provide for the active recreational needs of these groups through its ball fields, but the design of Central Park should include recreational features and employees of Downtown. 4 that can be used daily by the residents Erickson Park Erickson Park is located directly north of Central Park and contains several ball fields where organized athletic leagues play Erickson Park is not focused on the recreational needs of Downtown but instead functions as a community park. The Rosemount Interpretative Trail Corridor runs along the western and northern boundary of the ball fields connecting Central Park with the trail network along Connemara Trail. Polfus Property The Polfus property is 0.7 acres located south and west of Central Park. The property is owned by David Finnegan but is operated by Polfus Implement, a small equipment dealership which is headquartered in Hastings. The Polfus property has approximately 180 feet of frontage on 145 Street West and acquiring the property would allow the City to expand the Central Park facilities, as well as connect with the Downtown residents and employees. BP Property The BP property is 0.4 acres located southwest of Central Park. The property is owned by members of the Ahern family is operated by Mr. Wieland, a franchisee for BP gasoline. The BP property has approximately 110 feet of frontage onto 145` Street West and 150 feet of frontage onto South Robert Trail. Acquiring the BP property would allow the City to further expand Central Park, so it would serve as a gateway to Downtown with a significant presence on the corner of South Robert Trail and 145 Street West. 6 AVMHOIH mNnal Central Park Design Alternatives The City approached the design of the expansion of Central Park to include at least three scenarios. First, a scenario in which the City improves the property it currently owns. Second, the City explores the opportunities available if the City were to acquire the Polfus property in addition to the property it currently owns. Third, the City explores the opportunities available if the City were to acquire both the Polfus and the BP properties in addition to the properties it currently owns. These three scenarios are displayed in the five design alternatives discussed below. Alternative A Alternative A (Figure 2) displays the expansion opportunity available using only land the City owns. Alternative A shows the extension of the Rosemount Interpretive Trail Corridor from the shelter building to 145 Street West, improves the landscaping along the Trail, and reconstructs the pedestrian crossing at 145 Street and Burma Avenue. Alternative B Alternative B (Figure 3) displays the expansion opportunity available if acquiring the Polfus property is combined with the land the City currently owns. In addition to the improvements in Alternative A, Alternative B also realigns the Central Park /City Hall entrance to the Burma Avenue /145 Street intersection, adds a civic gathering space including a feature such as a water fountain, and improves the community gardens. Alternative C Alternative C (Figure 4) displays the first of three expansion opportunities available if the City were able to acquire the BP and Polfus properties in addition to the land the City already owns. Building on the improvements proposed in Alternate B, Alternative C adds additional assembly spaces such as a gazebo and further improves the community gardens. Alternative D Alternative D (Figure 5) displays the second of three expansion opportunities available if the City were able to acquire the BP and Polfus properties in addition to the land the City already owns. In addition to the improvements in Alternative B, Alternative D looks to add a retail space along 145 Street West and a parking lot to jointly serve the retail space and the Park. Tenants of the retail space are intended to be complementary to the functions within Central Park, such as a bike /skate /cross county ski rental shop or coffee /ice cream shop. Alternative E Alternative E (Figure 6) displays the third of three expansion alternatives available if the City were able to acquire the BP and Polfus properties in addition to the land the City already owns. In addition to the improvements in Alternative B, Alternative E looks to add a retail space along South Robert Trail and a parking lot to jointly serve the retail space and the Park. The tenants of the retail space are intended to be complementary to the functions within Central Park, such as a bike /skate /cross county ski rental shop or services such as a coffee shop or ice cream parlor. 8 CY!. V S M 0 Z g ..7 ri3 .1311\ I tJ o Z 0< 3 z 0 z W Z 0- XIX 0w< r I 1 C. n. 1 imo i tt ilk w itall vv4 AWAHOIR >INCALL )�1N1113 w wz 0 ce Z z cn w 0 w ri 7 fl z w u- 2 AVMHOIH )1NrIN1 3 11 ..i .g :7_•-__\\\-_ _--\:kiii t .1 1 cn C.Th C=tt 0 z —I 0 ii 0 t 0 ea v 3A1 Jayslhlf18 0 z P' i—. 0 W. —t w 2 >--e-- 0 0 z W 2 111 *rC 0 0 Y CL -.1 Z —I 0< 0 z( w z o cc w x w ;1' AYMHOIH mneu. \\\\\\\N\\\\ v LLI 0 Z 0 re L4J Z CC la v vrisne z w w 0 0 w 7 E Z w co o zz 0 0 0 z 0 z o X z 0 Lij Z i I s 1 Burma Avenue /City Hall /Central Park Entrance Intersection Realignment The design Alternatives B, C, D, and E show the realignment of the City Hall /Central Park entrance to the west to match up with the Burma Avenue intersection with 145 Street. This realignment has several advantages, including the improved vista down Burma Avenue into Central Park, improved vehicular safety by removing the conflicting left turn movements at Burma Avenue and the City Hall /Central Park entrance, and coordinating the realigned intersection with the pedestrian crossing at 145 Street West and the beginning of the Rosemount Interpretative Trail Corridor. This realignment also has one significant disadvantage, the relocation of the lift station on the north side of the intersection of Burma Avenue and 145 Street West. This is a substantial lift station for the City serving all of Downtown and a significant portion of the residents south of 145 Street West and west of South Robert Trail. The relocation of this lift station may cost in excess of $500,000, which would take significant funds from the Central Park expansion and development project. It is questionable if the above benefits warrant the realignment as depict ed. To address the financial concerns with the entrance realignment, the City Engineer developed another alternative for the Burma Avenue /City Hall /Central Park intersection (Figure 7) to allow the lift station to remain in its existing location. This realignment moves the City Hall /Central Park entrance as far west as possible while still allowing the extension of the Rosemount Interpretive Trail Corridor to 145 Street West and not requiring the lift station to be relocated. This realignment also requires that the Burma Avenue intersection is moved east to match with the new City Hall /Central Park entrance. The relocation of Burma Avenue would require the involvement of two additional landowners, the Rosemount Plaza Apartments west of Burma Avenue and the American Legion east of Burma Avenue. No property would need to be acquired from the Rosemount Plaza Apartments, but the City would need to coordinate with the apartments to ensure that their entrance is still usable, particularly for residents that need transportation assistance and handicap accessibility. A portion of the American Legion parking lot would need to be acquired for the Burma Avenue alignment. It appears that the American Legion would still have adequate parking available for its current operation in its reduced parking lot, but the City will need to work with the organization to ensure that there is appropriate ingress and egress to the parking lot. In addition, the four design alternatives need to be reviewed to ensure that the vista along Burma Avenue is maintained and that the pedestrian access at 145 Street West is not detrimentally affected. Central Park 2901145 Street West Implementation The five design alternatives illustrated within this plan are not intended to be mutually exclusive or that one alternative must be chosen as the preferred alternative for development. The five alternatives are meant to provide an incremental pattern in which Central Park can grow over time. The City owns all the land within Alternative A which 14 would allow that design to be constructed and implemented in the near future. Opportunities may present themselves where funding would be available and /or a willing seller of the Polfus property would allow the development of Alternative B. If there was additional funding and /or the owner of the BP property were a willing seller, then the City would have the opportunity to implement Alternatives C, D, or E. The alternatives within the Central Park Expansion Planning Study are intended to provide the City the most flexibility to take advantage, as opportunities arise, as well as provide a clear direction for the expansion and improvement of Central Park.. At the time of the expansion, the City Council may determine which alternative is more consistent with the goals of the community 15 a i 7 5 A 3 Next Steps The City will pursue funding for the expansion of Central Park as those opportunities become available. These opportunities may include grants (such as the Metropolitan Council's Livable Community Demonstration Account or the Dakota County Community Development Redevelopment Initiative Grant), private or non -profit donations, park improvement funds, or other funding sources as they become available. The funds that are indentified will be evaluated for their best use for either land acquisition or park improvement (or both). Without outside funding sources, it is unlikely that the City would be able to acquire the Polfus or BP properties. The City will maintain communication with the business and land owners of the two properties to ensure that the City has an opportunity to acquire those properties if any of the owners desire to sell. The City has met with the property owners twice during the development of the alternatives to communicate the intentions of the City as well as communicate that the City desires that the businesses relocate within Rosemount if they chose to move and /or sell. City staff has offered their services to the owners if their business plans require relocation due to expansions, changes in operation, or a willingness to sell their property. Staff will maintain periodic contact with the business owners to maintain this commitment and ensure that there is land available within the City for their businesses to relocate to. 17 E -mail from LaVonne Woodruff (the e -mail has been edited to remove any comments not regarding the Central Park Expansion Planning Study). 6/22/2009 Ok, I have read thru the CP study a few times now and wrote some comments below. Pg 2: It says the Dak Co CDA fronted $10,000 for the'study. Yet on page 3 $20,000 is mentioned? Which was it, and is this just for a 'study' What if there's t leftover? Etc. There is no contact info-phone number or email addr listed to help the public actually reach Dan Schultz. How much money will the entire project cost? And where will those monies come from You do mention some possible funding sources on pg 15... Is there a plan to expand beyond the downtown area, to other areas, as I keep suggesting? Y or N. Or is that on the back burner until this phase 1 is completed. If an expansion is something others want, it should always be in the backs of everyone's minds (i.e. the Big Picture) as they look at /approve this phase 1.... At what point does the study become a TO DO project? Right now, it sounds like it's more wishful thinking than an actual project? And or something that might be done IF the BP folks decide at some point to cooperate/ comply...? Is there an established timetable, with a completion date pg 4 "On July 21, 2009, the City Council reviewed and adopted the CP Expansion Planning Study." Uh, today is June 22nd, 2009 and we haven't even started July yet.) Will any add7project monies be available from the Trails /River people/projects Will the gravel mad (is that Burma? I can never remember) be asphalted, both to cut down on dust and also to present a more finished look? And I'm still not understanding where everyone who lives in areas other than downtown will PARK, when thy come to downtown to participate in the larger events? There should also be more than 1 entrance/exit (for traffic control, as well as emergenices). The proposed CP area -even expanded- -still seems too small for a town population of 22,000+ now.... Is there some sort of formulation used by cities to determine park sizes based on population density and more? Because it seems too small, I continue to suggest expanding to, and integrating with, other areas (the high school, Schwartz Park, to the E, and to the S...) with a more 'open plan', wide connecting walkway, maybe use tmllys to transport folks around during the largest events, and so on (i.e., have them park elsewhere and bring them in.) I'd like to know the answers to all of the above, and to know others' questions/ concerns also. If it could all be condensed /answered /posted on the City site, under this project heading/link, that'd make it easy for everyone interested to keep up -to -date. (Did I read something about a recent approval for some new software to aid in doing that Have a nice day, everyone LaVonne Woodruff Excerpt from the June 22, 2009 Parks and Recreation Meeting 7. NEW BUSINESS: a. Central Park Expansion Planning Study City staff have created a plan for the potential future expansion at Central Park. The study will be used in the future to apply for grants or other funding through such organizations as the Metropolitan Council or CDA. The study includes five design alternatives, none to be exclusive, that provide possible scenarios for expansion. The plan will be kept on file to show reviewers that the City has prepared for the expansion of the park. Schultz stressed that any development would require a much more detailed plan than those included in the study. The Commission asked what amenities would be added. Schultz explained that that would depend on which, if any, of the adjoining businesses the City would acquire. He reviewed the plans included in the study for each of the possible scenarios and explained that the City Council's goal is to allow for more development downtown by opening up this comer. They see this as a way of attracting people to downtown Rosemount. The Commission asked exactly what they were being asked to approve. Schultz explained that he was asking for a motion from the Commission supporting the expansion of Central Park, and the information in the report. The City Council's goal is to attract people to the downtown area through redevelopment, park development, and economic development. The Commission wasn't sure a fountain or gazebo would attract people, but thought that an incredible playground or a concert series would. They also mentioned all of the improvements needed at other parks. They wanted to be sure that they were not approving using park improvement funds to purchase properties. Schultz explained that they were not recommending approval of spending any funds by supporting the study. MOTION by Strayton to recommend that the City Council approve the Central Park Expansion Planning Study. SECOND by Knight. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion passed.