HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975 06-24 PRMMINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE :PARK
AND RECREATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
JUNE 24, 1975
CITY HALL
Call to Order The Brooklyn Center Park and Recreation Commission
met in regular session and was called to order by
Chairman Zerban at 7:05 p.m.
Roll Call Chairman Zerban, Commissioners Pickering, Johnson
and Grannes. Also present were Director of Park
and Recreation Gene Hagel, City Councilman Tony
Ku.efler, Mr. Robert Spies representing the Brooklyn
Center Community Education Council and Administra-
tive Assistant Jam s Lacina.
Approval of Minutes Motion by Commissioner Johnson and seconded by Com-
5-20-75 missioner Grannes to approve the minutes of the
May 20, 1975 meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
Tennis Court Chairman Zerban introduced the first item of busi-
• Lighting Report ness on the agenda, that of a tennis court lighting
study undertaken by the Brooklyn Center School
District Community Education Council. He intro-
duced Mr. Robert Spies who was representing the
Brooklyn Center Community Education Council.
Mr. Spies proceeded with an indepth review of the
cooperation that Brooklyn Center School District
and the City of Brooklyn Center have enjoyed over
recent years regarding school and City programs
and facilities.
Commissioner Harvey arrived at 7:10 p.m.
He then noted that the Community Education Council
was presenting a program for tennis court lighting
of the eight tennis courts located at Brooklyn
Center High School. He noted that a joint approach
with the City and the School District on this matter
would reduce the cost for both of the parties con-
cerned.
Commissioner Bogle arrived at 7:15 p.m.
He next reviewed the existing use of the tennis
courts noting that the City was presently program-
ming recreational programs on these courts and in
fact used them quite extensively. He reviewed a
study which depicted the use, numbers of and cost
of operation for tennis courts in other suburban
cities. He noted that the cost for lighting
these tennis courts would be approximately
$14,500 plus $250 each for the four meters required
to operate the lights. He noted that the standard
charge for lights was 25~- for 15 minutes.
An-extensive discussion ensued relative to the tennis
court proposal. The secretary inquired as to the
maintenance of the courts. Mr. Spies responded by
noting that he felt the School District would continue
to maintain the courts as it has been doing in regular
fashion.
Chairman Zerban inquired as to the City's share of the
total. projected cost, Mr. Spies responded by noting
that he thought the cost, would be split 50 - 50 to the
City and the School District. He further noted that
he felt this additional service could be provided for
little cost to both participants and that he felt it
was a service that was needed in the community.
Additional discussion pursued relative to the possi-
bility of benches for spectators and wind screening,
Mr. Spies noted that these two items were also con-
sidered in the ultimate proposal.
Chairman Zerban then acknowledged acceptance of the
tennis court. lighting proposal. He thanked Mr. Spies
for his presentation and noted that this proposal
would be referred to the City Manager and staff for
review,
The Park and Recreation Commission recessed at
7.-45 p.m. and resumed at 8-.05 p.m.,
Chairman Zerban noted that the tennis court proposal
would be treated in a similar manner as other
athletic association proposals regarding additional
facilities Commissioner Pickering noted that he
felt the age group of the tennis participants was
much larger than other team sports and because of
its availability to the general public he noted
that he felt there was merit to considering a
lighting proposal,
Commissioner Bogle noted that he did not feel it
was comparable to -team sports and that by the wide
spread use of tennis facilities, lights would be
warranted at this site.
Commissioner Gra.nnes noted that she felt lights
could be justified for tennis since most of the
other park and athletic association activities
already have lighted facilities.
•
Recess
Continued Discussion
of Tennis Court
Proposal
6®24®75 -2-
A lengthy discussion ensued relative to the tennis
court proposal. Councilman Kuefler reviewed the
budget procedure noting that he did not feel the
expenditure of that amount could be comprehended
in the existing budget. He commented that he
felt if a proposal of this nature were to be con-
sidered it would have to be a capital expenditure
budgeted for that purpose.
Commissioner Harvey then commented that he felt
the Commission should take a position on recom-
mending capital items for the 1976 budget. He
noted that if dollars were available, the Commis-
sion should present a proposal to the City Council
regarding certain expenditures for capital items
in the parks
The secretary briefly reviewed the philosophy of
the Comprehensive Plan and the expenditures for
capital items in the parks. He did note, however,
that if the Commission so desired to recommend
capital items, they should do it in a conceptual
manner and not indicate specific expenditures for
specific items.
A brief discussion ensued relative to this topic.
• Councilman Kuefler noted that capital expenditure
items may be considered during the process of the
Comprehensive Plan but that dollar amounts for
them would be decided at the Council level He
also noted that the Commission should approach
the matter as a statement of intent if the money
were available rather than outlining specific
proposals to be considered.
Commissioner Harvey noted his concern for the
intent of capital expenditures in the parks,
speeding up the Comprehensive Plan process and
the recommending of specific proposals.
A brief discussion ensued relative to the hiring
of a consultant for the formulation of policy as
recommended at the previous Commission meeting.
The secretary noted that the City Manager was
still in the process of reviewing this matter
and selecting an appropriate consultant.
Following further discussion, there was a motion
by Commissioner Harvey and seconded by Commis-
sioner Grannes to direct the secretary to draft
a resolution stating the intent and requesting
consideration for allocation of capital expendi-
tures for the parks for budget year 1976. The
motion passed unanimously.
3® 6®24®75
W
Mr. Hagel then reviewed the recreational facilities
tour sponsored by the Minnesota Recreation and Park
Association. He noted that the tour would start
from Columbia Heights Field House at 1®30 p.m. on
Thursday, dune 26 and that it was scheduled to stop
at the Brooklyn Center Community Center at 4:10 p.m.
on that day. He urged participation if at all possible
by the Commission members.
Mr. Hagel then proceeded with a review of the Palmer
Lake facilities. He noted the Brauer Plan of 1968
which comprehended complete development of the area..
He then reviewed the changes of philosophy regarding
the use of this area as a naturalist area or as an
activity type park. He noted that the first concept
of this area considered it as a natural area but that
since that time there have been several natural areas
designated and that this concept might possibly be
reconsidered at this point in time. He next reviewed
the costs for complete development as outlined by the
Brauer plan. He noted that there were specific problems
with this area and many questions that needed to be
answered before the decision of development. He noted
that the community park along 69th Avenue, construction
of a nature center and the controlled access were a few
of the considerations. He then commented that this
specific area was a good example of how the entire park
system and capital development must be continually
reviewed to identify priorities for development.
Recreational
Facilities Tour
Palmer :sake Review
0
Motion by Commissioner Harvey and seconded by Commis-- Adjournment
sioner Bogle to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed
unanimously. The Brooklyn Center Park and Recreation
Commission adjourned at 9m50 p.m.
Chairman
0
6-24-75 -4-