HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12-16-02APPROVED
Members Present: Mark Jacobs, Eric Johnson, Jason Scribner, Phil Sterner
Members Absent: Mike Eliason
Staff Present: Dan Schultz, Director of Parks and Recreation and Sonja Honl, Recording Secretary
Others Present: None
1. Call to Order: Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. Additions to the Agenda: None
Approval of the December 16, 2002 Agenda: MOTION by Johnson to approve the agenda of December 16, 2002. SECOND by Scribner. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion carried.
3. Approval of the November 25, 2002 Minutes: MOTION by Sterner to approve the minutes of November 25, 2002. SECOND by Johnson. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion carried.
4. Audience Input: None
5. Discussion (Response to Audience Input): None
6. Old Business:
Bloomfield Park – Staff reviewed the bids received in November for this project. We received five bids, up from three bids received when the project was put out for bid in August.
Looking at the budget and the bids received, Schultz thought it would be best to approve bid items #1 and #2, with the low bidder being Frattalone Paving at $510,872. If we choose
not to pave the rink and go with bid item #1, the low bidder would be Heselton at 480,000. Schultz explained why it would be in our best interest to go with bid items #1 and #2, instead
of waiting to pave the rink at a later date. Schultz reviewed a chart with the bid information that was included in the packet and explained the differences in the bids. Schultz
noted that the bids do not include playground equipment. The project would start in the spring as soon as the weight limitations on roads are removed. Playground equipment will be
bid in January and would be installed when grading of the site is being worked on, and before the parking lots, trails, etc. are done. Jacobs asked if there would be any additional
costs if we approved bid items #1 and #2. Per Schultz, there would be no additional costs, the bid covers everything. Schultz added that inspection fees may be an additional cost,
however, in the past these fees have been paid by Parks Dedication Funds or they could be covered by funds built into the 2003 budget, therefore they would not affect the price of the
project. Schultz is also waiting to see if the budget for a Parks Supervisor position is approved. This position would be responsible for the inspections on park projects. Schultz
would also do some inspections, and we would also possibly have a contract with someone to inspect the project during construction.
MOTION by Johnson to accept the bids as received and proceed forward with bid #1 and #2, working with Frattalone Paving as the low bidder on the Bloomfield Park Project. Jacobs asked
for inclusion of the bid amounts in the motion. Friendly amendment by Jacobs to include the separate bid amounts for items #1 - $487,922 and #2 - $22,950, for a total bid amount of
$510,872. SECOND by Scribner. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion carried. Staff will bring back information regarding the inspection fees to the January 2003 meeting.
2003 Fees and Fee Policy – Schultz answered questions from the last meeting regarding the fee and cancellation policy for the arena and provided examples of how fees are currently collected,
and the
percentage of ice time being used. We currently collect 50% of the fee at the time the signed contract is returned (this amount is non-refundable) and the remaining balance before the
group skates. RAHA and RHS pay monthly after they skate. Schultz then reviewed spreadsheets for 2001and 2002 that showed the hours of ice time available, who is using it, the hours
being used, and revenue. Schultz recommended changing item 3. under section D. Deposits as noted on page 6 of the arena portion of the 2003 Fees and Fee Policy to reflect how we are
currently collecting fees.
MOTION by Sterner to change the language as shown. SECOND by Scribner. Discussion: Johnson questioned the removal of “non-refundable” from item 3. Friendly amendment by Johnson
to retain “non-refundable” prior to the word “deposit” in the re-wording of item 3. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0
Motion carried.
Parks Dedication – Schultz reviewed the completed report on land values. Dennis Kelsall, a real-estate appraiser who does work for the City of Burnsville, Dakota County and
the State of Minnesota, had been hired to research typical land values in the surrounding area for Low Density Residential (single family), Medium Density Residential (twin homes, town
homes, etc.) Commercial and Industrial. The price of land can vary significantly, but the values determined by Mr. Kelsall are typical or average prices. The report shows that we
are close in some areas, but not in others. Our current fees are: Residential - $45,000; Commercial - $40,000; and Industrial - $40,000. Schultz had not had time to discuss the
report with other staff members and get their feedback, as the report was received just before tonight’s meeting. Schultz offered to bring back more information on this report next
month after a closer review. Sterner was willing to make a motion on this item. Jacobs suggested waiting to move forward on this item as Schultz had not had time to review the report
with other staff members and there also seemed to be a lack of current information. Schultz stated that the data was accurate and that this is the most current information available
at this time.
MOTION by Sterner that the fees be set as follows: Residential: $45,000; Industrial: $45,000; and Commercial: $50,000. Motion not passed due to lack of second.
Johnson asked Schultz to bring back information on Low-Density development figures from several surrounding communities to see if there’s a trend at the $60,000 to $65,000 range. The
report only included figures from Inver Grove Heights. Johnson felt that we shouldn’t leave money on the table that we could have collected because we have set our fees too low.
Scribner agreed with the Residential and Industrial fees, but questioned the Commercial fees. He asked for a clarification of Industrial and Commercial usage. Per Schultz, Commercial
would be similar to the developments along County Road 42 and downtown Rosemount. Industrial would be developments that are further out, such as those in the east and southeast parts
of town. Schultz also said that developers can question their fees and the City Council can consider negotiating the fees. Schultz stated that we are just trying to set fees based
on what we are finding the averages or median to be. The Commission asked how much Commercial and Industrial land is still available for development. Schultz will include a current
zoning map in the packet for next month’s meeting that will show the commercial and industrial areas available for development. Johnson asked if there was any need to have the changes
on this item voted on before year-end. Per Schultz, there is not. The Commission decided to wait for more information before moving forward on this item.
MOTION withdrawn by Sterner.
Schultz will bring the following back for the next meeting: MRPA study on Park Dedication fees, an updated zoning map that includes information on areas zoned for commercial and industrial
use, and land value information from other communities focusing on low-density and commercial areas.
7. New Business:
a. Director’s Report -
The Park Improvement Fund balance as of November 30, 2002 is $645,647.30. Rosewood was coming in today to pick up some final plats and pay approximately $50,000, which is one-half of
their fee. They will pay the remaining half in the spring. There were no expenditures this month. We just received $62,100 from Biscayne Point. Bard’s Crossing fees have not been
received, as they have not been in to final plat anything. The big upcoming project is Bloomfield Park.
Future Park - Schultz has still not been able to get access to the property. Schultz has been in contact with a representative from Centex Homes and he will coordinate an on-site visit
this month.
Schultz distributed copies of the completed Parks Master Plan to the Commission and asked that they review it for any changes or questions. Once that’s done, we can make any necessary
changes and then distribute it to the City Council, the Planning Commission, etc.
Johnson asked if there have been any updates regarding the skate park. Per Schultz we will be sending out a mass mailing to companies in and outside of our community asking for donations.
The League of Minnesota Cities, which is the City’s insurance provider, is doing a study on Tier I vs. Tier II heights. They are asking for feedback from communities who have or
are planning to build skate parks. Schultz informed the Commission that we were asked to be on a petition to change the heights of Tier I skate parks from three feet and below to four
feet and below. Schultz has also talked to a council member who is supportive of the skate park project. We plan to move forward with the skate park and begin building in the spring
of 2003.
Jacobs asked where the Park Improvement funds are invested, noting the interest of $11.67 received for November. Schultz will get a report from the Finance Director regarding this and
bring it to the next meeting.
8. Adjournment: MOTION by Scribner to adjourn the meeting. SECOND by Sterner. The meeting was adjourned at 8:08 p.m. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Sonja Honl,
Recording Secretary