HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-31• CITY OF LAKEVILLE
LAKEVILLE CITY COUNCIL /
PARK BOND REFERENDUM TASK FORCE
JOINT WORK SESSION -MARCH 31, 1994
Mayor Duane Zaun called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM and introduced
Task Force Chairperson Kevin Illa. Present were Councilmembers Harvey,
Sindt, Mulvihill and Johnson, and Mayor Zaun. Representin the task force
were Clem Czerniak, Mary Liz Holberg :Wally Potter, Jeff La~avre and Kevin
Ilia. Also present were City Administrator Bob Erickson, Parks and
Recreation Director Steve Michaud and Recording Secretary Judi Ryan.
The objectives and process of the Park Bond Referendum task force were
discussed. The task force was originally authorized by City .Council with
its agenda to review present and future park and trail needs within the City
of Lakeville and make a recommendation to Council concerning the need, scope
and dollar amount of a bond referendum for the purpose of develo ment and
acquisition of park and recreation facilities within Lakeville. Members of
the task force included representatives of several athletic groups, advisory
committees, residential neighborhoods, the agricultural community,
homeowners associations, civic organizations, community organizations such
as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, school districts, and citizens at large.
The task force met every two weeks with an average attendance of 25
members. Topics explored included bond referendum management, financing,
park and tral system plans,, 1992. city survey .results, statistical .growth
data on youth and adult athletics, .neighborhood park needs, community park
needs, environmental and conservation issues, trails and the impact of
school districts on park needs.
After presenters provided facts and statistical data at several meetings,
the task force was then broken into small groups to prioritize the several
suggested bond referendum projects and to allow members to offer suggestions
of their own. Members then reconvened into a large group and developed a
consensus on a final project list.
Clem Czerniak, representing the Lakeville Baseball Association, presented
statistics from various sports and their pro ected facility needs. The
population forecasts are tracked with school enrollments and past
projections have been very accurate. The baseball program this year had
projected registrations of 1,392, based on 60% of elementary school boys
signing , up for the program. With late sign-ups still, being taken,
registrations are presently at 1,375. It is felt that with the school
enrollments increasing at their present rate, and with impprovements to the
program that will attract more layers, four new fields w11 be needed each
Year to accommodate growth. ~e program has gone from a Monday through
Thursday program to a Monday through Saturday program to maximize use of
available fields. The LBA will use the four new fields at Quigley-Sime to
meet their growth this year.
The girls fastpitch softball program will need two new fields each ear to
• meet their projected growth. -This year they will expand to the fyelds at
the new elementary school.
City Council/Task Force Work Session
March 31, 1994
Page -2-
The soccer program started small and has been growing at a tremendous rate.
Their program will require at least two to three new fields per year.
Gym time for the basketball program is also at a premium. Even with the
addition of new schools there are not enough hours to .meet all use demands.
Presently this program is growing at a rate of 30 % per year.
Adult athletics are in need of more lighted fields, possibly at Aronson Park
and also volleyball courts, both inside and out.
All aspects of .the Lakeville Athletic Association are in significant need of
athletic facilities. Mr. Czerniak stated they, are close to limiting
enrollment to what the facilities' maximum use is, and are almost to the
point of having to turn kids away.
Trails were also discussed by the task force, especially in the Orchard Lake
area. The City's policy is ,to have trails constructed as development occurs
but older areas remain which are not served by trails. Dr. Morris from
Decision Resources had stated that 55 % of residents use the trails.
Citizens are also requesting more neighborhood parks closer to their homes.
They are not comfortable with letting their children walk or ride their
• bikes to a park which is many blocks away. Dr. Morris had stated that 77
of the opulation uses their neighborhood parks and called them the building
block o~ the park system.
Environmental and conservation issues were also discussed by the task force.
There was a real sense of urgency to acquire land for future community
parks, to keep the balance of open space, and to preserve the ecosystem.
There are also several im rovements which are needed at the Senior Center
and throughout the park system to comply with the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Additional issues which the task force had discussed concerned developing
existing parks as opposed to purchasing more property; funds set aside for
the northeast sector community park;, removal of the proposed neighborhood
park buildings and parking Iot paving from the priority listing; and the
addition of an environmental education building, at Ritter Farm Park to the
priority listing; and a possible future community/teen center. A possible
split question on the ballot was also discussed with the purchase of the
property on the west side of Lake Marion being tie second issue. Task force
members voted overwhelmingly to include all issues as a single question on
the ballot, if the referendum was authorized by City Council.
The task force ultimately recommended City Council authorize a park bond
referendum in the amount of $3.9 million hold the referendum as soon as
possible, hopefully no later than June 2~, 1994, and ask the citizens to
• approve the priority list as a single question on the ballot.
City Council/Task Force Work Session
• March 31, 1994
Page -3-
It was emphasized to City Council that task force members had recognized a
spectrum of needs and their overriding statement was the need to purchase
land for present and future parks and recreation needs. Members felt that
spring and early summer are the most active use times of the parks and the
awareness of need would be the greatest. Also the interest rates are very
favorable at this time. It was also noted that on the list of priorities,
the task force had made it very clear that each item is as important as the
others.
Mayor Zaun commented that the Council may want to take some. time to reflect
on the recommendation and may have some questions for task force members.
Some consideration also needs to be given to timing with other issues that
may be going on in the community Councilmember Harvey commended the task
force for the fine job they had done and stated that City Council may need
another work session to fine tune their recommendations.
Councilmember Sindt asked how far into the future the $3.9 million had been
projected to meet the park and. recreation needs. It was felt that it could
e from three to five years, based on additional school facilities also
being added to the system and the development of fields at the northeast
sector park. Bob Erickson stated that if growth continues as projected, new
schools are certain to be built. The school district is working closely
• with the city to provide four fields at every new school. Task force
members were very concerned about affordable land not being available in the
future.
Council members asked who could join the youth sports leagues and were told
that there are no resident restrictions. This works out eauitably with
neighboring cities for reciprocal arrangements. Staff mentioned that church
leagues also request fields on an intermittent basis and every effort is
made to meet their needs plus those of any other group requesting fields.
Wally Potter commented that the task force had a consensus on the issues:
the unportance of planning for the future; land won't be available forever;
the entire commumty will benefit from the referendum; and there is overall
task force support for a referendum. A number of task force members had
wanted to recommend the entire ppriority list early in the process but when
it was decided that it needed to be pared down, it was their overwhelming
opinion to leave .things in that could not be replaced in the future. It was
felt that the need was to purchase land and things such as parking lot
paving could be done at a later date. It was also felt that the projects
were spread equitably throughout the community.
The need for trails in the Orchard Lake area was discussed. Bob Erickson
stated that the residents in this area had submitted a petition to City
Council in 1989 asking that a solution be found to that problem. The
bi~gest impediments at that time were the railroad underpass, the lack of a
sa a crossing onto County Road 44, and the lack of shoulders on County .Road
• 44 and County Road 5. With the turnback program, there may be a possibility
of correcting these problems with road reconstruction.
City Council/Task Force Work Session
March 31, 1994
Page -4-
Councilmember Johnson asked about the building being planned for Ritter Farm
Park and wondered why a building would be part of the issue when land seems
to be the biggggest priority. Illa stated the task force members' opinion was
that the build~mg would allow the resources at the park to be utilized to a
greater degree and provide ,an educational opportunity for residents. The
capacittyy of the current building is small and a place is needed which would
hold 8D to 100 people, or several classes of students. Harvey stated that
environmental programs are best held outdoors.
Mary Liz Holberg maintained that funds will most likely not be available in
the park budget to put up this building any time in the near future. It was
also mentioned that Dakota Countx may have some responsibilitx for providing
those facilities. Lynette Mulvihill mentioned that the Council. had not yet
made a decision as to Ritter Farm Park's future programmatic use.
Bob Erickson stated that the proposed building would increase the parks and
Th reation operating budget substantially , and be an ongoing yearly expense .
e school system does not currently utilize the park and a building may be
a premature and unnecessary expenditure. Harvey stated that he would prefer
to see the $300,000 used for acquisition of land, as land will soon become
unattainable. Ilia said he felt the task force would wholeheartedly support
further land acquisition.
The development of the pproperty ad'oining Valley Lake Park was discussed.
Mulvihill stated that a Iot of wor~ has been done in the area recently.
Staff stated that it has been their plan to move the beach to the north side
of the park if that pproperty was ever developed. , The construction and
location of a possible multipurpose building sunilar to the one at
Foxborough was discussed. It was a general consensus that a better location
for that type of shelter would be near the ballfields and school rather than
the beach- because it would be used more months of the year. In addition to
the multipurrppose building a .smaller shelter/restoom facility would work well
at the beachfront.
The importance of purchasing land outside the MUSA to be used for athletic
field development was again stated as a very high priority to the task
force. Staff stated that if land is purchased there wi l be an attempt to
find property which . is as flat and centrally located as possible to reduce
further costs for grading. Several comments were made concerning the vision
of past community leaders in their acquisition of Ritter Farm Park, Aronson
Park : etc. It is felt that West Lake Marion is a good example of this
foresight for the preservation of an irreplaceable parcel of property.
Staff was asked to provide, statistics on national standards compared to
Lakeville park acres per capita and at what population were the park needs
actually being adequately met.
Clem Czerniak stated a real sense of urgency from the task force and a great
• confidence in the ability to pass a referendum for the projects listed.
Wally Potter stated that with the support of the organizations represented
City Council/Task Force Work Session
• March 31, 1994
Page -5-
on the task force, there should not be a problem getting adequate voter
support.
Staff stated that a great deal of statistics and documentation is available
from the many .presentations made to the task force at the early meetings.
If City Council wishes to receive a complete packet of this information they
are invited to call the Parks and Recreation office at City Hall. A task
force meeting had been tentatively set for April 14th but it was suggested
that it be postponed until the last Thursday of April , to allow the City
Council time for another work session prior to making a decision.
Mayor Zaun commended the volunteers of the task force for the good job they
have done.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~~ ~
Judi .Ryan, ecor i g ecretary
jr