Loading...
2001-01-08 f 1 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE 2 PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD 3 4 5 January 8, 2001 6 7 MINUTES 8 9 Board Members Present: Sherry Berman, Chair; Jim Glover, Mary Georgia, Cara White, Lisa 10 Stokdyk, Michael Nelson 11 12 Board Members Absent: Chris Miltenberger, Vice-Chair 13 14 Staff Members Present: Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services; Steve Polasek, 15 Deputy Director of Community Services; Chris Carpenter, Senior Parks Planner; Ben Henry, 16 Park Planning and Construction Superintendent; Steve Moore, Recreation Supervisor; Missy 17 Fisher, Recreation Specialist 18 19 Regular Session: 20 21 Agenda Item No. 1, Call to Order. Chair Sherry Berman called the meeting to order at 7:00 22 p.m. 23 24 Agenda Item No. 2, Reports. 25 26 Mr. Hugman stated that he would like to mention that the old phone system for the city has 27 been replaced with a new phone system, and as such, staff's numbers have changed. He 28 apologized for any confusion related to this and noted that the Board now has a list of new 29 numbers. 30 31 Mr. Hugman also said that planning is underway for the circus on March 29' and 30`'', and the 32 Friends of the Library are interested in partnering in the circus, with a share of the proceeds to 33 benefit the library. Mr. Nelson asked that staff bring an update on the planning back to the 34 February meeting. 35 36 Ms. White asked for a copy of the Recreation Center "bullet points" presented by staff at the 37 December meeting, as well as a copy of Mike Conrads' notes from the SPIN meeting held at 38 the Senior Center. 39 40 Ms. Berman mentioned that the irrigation study for Bicentennial Park is being worked on by 41 Ben Henry and that some results may be evident in a month or so. 42 43 Mr. Hugman introduced Missy Fisher, who has been working on a preliminary program for 44 Therapeutic Recreation (TR). Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 1 of 11 N. I Parks & Recreation I BOARDSI PKBOARDI MINUTESI20011010801. doc 1 Ms. Fisher stated, in the short time she has had to gather information for a TR program in 2 Southlake, she has placed an item in the Southlake Scene to introduce herself, the concepts of 3 TR, and three programs to begin initially, based on age groups. The Kid's Club, ages 6 to 12, 4 is based mainly on doing crafts, athletics, and other weekly activities to improve motor skills 5 and social interaction opportunities. The Teen Club, ages 13 to 18, is much the same, with an 6 additional focus of planning a community outing for the last meeting. The Club Metro program 7 is for young adults, possibly 17 to 30, with alternating event planning and social meetings out 8 in the community. Ms. Fisher also stated she is in need of a focus group of parents to assist her 9 with ideas. 10 11 Mr. Nelson stated that Ms. Fisher may want to sit in on a meeting in late January of CISD 12 participants in the Special Olympics, and to contact Ms. Pack with CISD for details. He also 13 stated the 17 to 30 program should be very useful to special needs youths who are out of 14 school. 15 16 Ms. Berman stated she'd like to accommodate audience member Matt Tuggey, who is on the 17 agenda for the girls softball Facilities Usage Agreement. The Board agreed that Mr. Tuggey's 18 presence was not needed for that item. 19 20 21 CONSENT AGENDA: 22 23 Agenda Item No. #3A, Approval of the minutes from the December 11, 2000 meeting. 24 25 Mr. Hugman stated that Ms. Stokdyk, who will be arriving late from a flight, has changes to 26 the minutes on consent. Ms. White also said she had changes. 27 28 Motion was made to table the approval of the minutes to the February 12, 2001, meeting. 29 30 Motion: Glover 31 Second: White 32 Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, White, Georgia 33 Nayes: None 34 Approved: 5-0 35 36 (Ms. Stokdyk was not present for this item.) 37 38 Motion carried. 39 40 Agenda Item No. #5B, Approval of park dedication requirements Cornerstone Plaza, Lots 1, 41 2, and 3, Block A. 42 43 Ms. White made a motion to add this item to the consent agenda for approval. 44 45 Motion: White Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 2 of 11 N.•IParks & Recreation IBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc 1 Second: Glover 2 Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, White, Georgia 3 Nayes: None 4 Approved: 5-0 5 6 (Ms. Stokdyk was not present for this item.) 7 8 Motion carried. 9 10 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON CONSENT ITEMS 11 12 Agenda item No. 5B. Approval of park dedication requirements for Cornerstone Plaza, Lots 1, 13 2 and 3, Block A of the Thomas Easter Survey, Abstract 474. The developer requests to pay 14 fees in the amount of $11,460 for this commercial development. Staff concurs with the request 15 and recommends approval. 16 17 REGULAR AGENDA: 18 19 Agenda Item #4A, Public Forum. 20 21 Al Morin, 1012 Diamond Blvd, Southlake, Texas, stated that he was disappointed in the events 22 subsequent to the meeting at the Senior Center concerning the Rec. Center siting. He stated that 23 the people in attendance were told that they would be notified when this item came up again for 24 discussion. He stated he received a call three hours before the meeting, and he feels staff is 25 creating a problem of distrust among some angry people in the community who are "digging in" 26 and who feel like the city does not have any credibility with them. Mr. Morin stated he was 27 sharing this as information, because now we have a credibility issue. He stated that we will hear 28 this in public forum now; people will come forward and use this as fodder. 29 30 Mr. Hugman stated that the comment to the SPIN group about not bringing anything forward and 31 making any decisions without them knowing was his commitment, and he still stands by it. It 32 was staff's intention to bring it to the Park Board to brief the board about what had happened at 33 the SPIN meeting, not to make a decision about where it goes, and to only see if the Park Board 34 wanted to narrow the list. He stated that he had not considered calling people because that kind 35 of discussion was not what he was trying to accomplish at the meeting. 36 37 Mr. Glover stated that it was made very clear to the Park Board that the purpose was not to make 38 a decision. The purpose of the meeting was to review what had happened for those who were not 39 at the SPIN meeting, to narrow the list, or add to the list, for further study. Mr. Glover stated he 40 thinks the public has a certain amount of responsibility to check the agendas, posted 72 hours in 41 advance, like Mr. Morin stated, and that when a vote comes up, the commitment to notify will 42 still be there. 43 44 Ms. Berman stated that she knew the discussion was coming that night and she instructed Steve 45 Polasek to call the people. She said that an air of distrust was not what she was trying to create. 46 Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 3 of 11 N.IParks & Recreation IBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc I Ms. Georgia stated that there must be misinformation about the Board's intent regarding the Rec. 2 Center circulating around. She suggested that the minutes of that meeting be provided. 3 4 Ms. White added that as a discussion item, parties wishing to voice opinions about a particular 5 site may be frustrated by the Board's inability to accommodate all aspects into the discussion, 6 which is meant as an item for the Board to discuss among themselves, with all the options, not 7 just deferring to one group. 8 9 Ms. Berman closed the Public Forum. 10 11 Agenda Item #5A, Election of Officers 12 13 Cara White nominated Sherry Berman as chair, and Mary Georgia seconded. Cara White 14 amended her motion to simply keep the officers the same as they currently exist. Mary Georgia 15 seconded. 16 17 Motion: White 18 Second: Georgia 19 Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, Georgia, White 20 Nayes: None 21 Approved: 5-0 22 23 (Ms. Stokdyk was not present for this item.) 24 25 Motion carried. 26 27 Agenda Item #5C, Matching funds request from Southlake Baseball Association for shade 28 structures for baseball fields in Bicentennial Park. 29 30 Steve Polasek stated that the SBA has elected to put their funding towards the bleacher shade 31 structures for Fields #4 through #10 (baseball fields) at the cost of approximately $130,000, with 32 $65,000 being made by the SBA match. The structures themselves are similar to what are seen at 33 certain car dealerships, athletic facilities, etc. The project includes design, purchase and 34 installation of galvanized structures and shade fabric, probably to match existing shade 35 structures. Estimated completion around July of 2001. 36 37 Mr. Nelson inquired of the structure material (similar to Classic Chevrolet), and insurance for 38 damage (covered under city's policy). 39 40 Ms. Berman asked if discoloring is a problem, and Mr. Polasek stated not too much, but the cost 41 to maintain the fabric is much less. Ms. Berman asked about carryover of 1999-2000 matching 42 funds, and Mr. Hugman stated that the funds didn't carry and were zeroed, but he would go back 43 to SPDC for an increase if the need arose. 44 45 Mr. Glover was concerned about spending over half the budget in January. Mr. Polasek noted his 46 concern, but added that SBA makes a good partner, and that this improvement will improve the Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 4 of 11 N.IParks & Recreation IBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc 1 situation of many, many people. Also, concerning softball, he said they would prefer to invest in 2 the new complex. 3 4 Ms. Georgia asked if the structures are within our own regulations. Mr. Polasek stated that Chris 5 Carpenter has said that they are. 6 7 Mr. Polasek stated that SBA intends to recognize sponsors in signage on these structures. The 8 Board agreed that problems have arisen with signs of this sort, especially with consistency. Mr. 9 Glover noted that they should revisit the signs as a separate issue when the implementation time 10 arises and not give "blanket" approval now. Mr. Nelson stated the use agreements are a good 11 place to regulate them, and can be added as an addendum to the contract. 12 13 Motion was made to approve the SBA matching funds request for shade structures in the amount 14 of $65,000. 15 16 Motion: Georgia 17 Second: Glover 18 Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, Georgia, White 19 Nayes: None 20 Approved: 5-0 21 22 (Ms. Stokdyk was not present for this item.) 23 24 Motion carried. 25 26 Agenda Item #51), Matching funds request from Southlake Baseball Association for irrigation 27 improvements for Bicentennial Park baseball fields #4, #5 and #10. 28 29 Mr. Polasek stated that drainage problems exist on fields #4, #5 and #10. Also, turf 30 improvements have been made in the area, and staff determined that some grading work, 31 irrigation improvements and erosion control are needed. SBA indicated they would provide 32 $2,500 towards the irrigation improvements, with SPDC Special Projects funds of $3,500, parks 33 maintenance operating funds of $2,000. The request is for matching funds of $1,250. 34 35 Mr. Glover and Ms. White asked about tearing up the field, and Mr. Polasek stated the turf 36 would not be lost. 37 38 Ms. White asked Ben Henry if the overall irrigation study could address this at a later date, and 39 Mr. Henry and Mr. Hugman stated that the irrigation needs to go in now to care for the turf 40 properly, and the irrigation study result would not change that need. 41 42 A motion was made to approve the matching funds request for $1,500 for irrigation 43 improvements. 44 45 Motion: Glover 46 Second: White Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 5 of 11 N.Warks & Recreation IBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc I Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, Georgia, White 2 Nayes: None 3 Approved: 5-0 4 5 (Ms. Stokdyk was not present for this item.) 6 7 Motion carried. 8 9 Agenda Items #5E, 5F, and 5G. Facilities Utilization Agreement for Southlake Baseball 10 Association (SBA) 11 12 Mr. Hugman noted that the city does not provide the services of these associations, therefore a 13 usage agreement is necessary with the three associations that use our facilities. The Facility 14 Utilization Agreements address a number of contractual issues between the city and the youth 15 sports associations. The major change in this years' agreements is the addition of a user fee to 16 be assessed beginning in the Fall 2001 season. This idea has previously been discussed with the 17 Board to get their input, and then discussed with the associations. 18 19 Mr. Glover inquired as to where the $8 figure came from, and Mr. Hugman stated it 20 approximated the area norm. Mr. Glover asked about how much additional money that would 21 mean this year from the baseball association, and Mr. Polasek stated approximately $5600, at 22 700 to 800 members. 23 24 Mr. Nelson asked that the contract(s) be amended to include additional language in the 25 indemnity section; remove the double "within" wording; change the phrase "and/or" to clarify 26 meaning; change the minimum limit revision section to include "Coverage C;" take out the 27 wording "or an insured" and list as "additional insured;" add two paragraphs including "this 28 agreement was prepared by the joint efforts of the parties," and "this contract can be amended 29 by the written agreement of both parties," where applicable. Mr. Nelson was to furnish staff 30 his notes on the contracts. 31 32 Mr. Glover reiterated his concern about the public's limited use of the fields, though he will 33 vote in favor of the usage agreements. He stated he would like to see the city provide a field 34 for the public's use for pick-up games, etc. 35 36 Motion was made to approve the usage agreement with SBA, with amendments as discussed. 37 38 Motion: White 39 Second: Glover 40 Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, Georgia, White 41 Nayes: None 42 Approved: 5-0 43 44 (Ms. Stokdyk was not present for this item.) 45 Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 6 of 11 N.Warks & Recreation IBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc 1 Motion carried. 2 3 Agenda Items OF Facilities Utilization Agreement for Southlake Girls Softball Association 4 (SGSA) 5 6 Motion was made to approve the usage agreement with SGSA, with amendments as discussed. 7 8 Motion: White 9 Second: Glover 10 Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, Georgia, White 11 Nayes: None 12 Approved: 5-0 13 14 (Ms. Stokdyk was not present for this item.) 15 16 Motion carried. 17 18 Agenda Item #5G. Facilities Utilization Agreement for Grapevine-Southlake Soccer 19 Association (GSSA) 20 21 Mr. Hugman stated he would like to add some comments on this agreement, noting that league 22 president Tony DeBruno had to be at another commitment tonight and not had a lot of time to 23 discuss the detail of the user fee issue, however a meeting with him is scheduled for tomorrow. 24 Mr. Hugman stated that Mr. DeBruno's issue with lighting soccer fields is not really a usage 25 agreement issue but rather a capital projects issue. Mr. DeBruno also inquired of Mr. Hugman 26 about increased Joint Use access, and Mr. Hugman stated he will look into it. The user fee, 27 again, is complicated with soccer because the league is divided into two cities, and the equity 28 issue come into play. Mr. Hugman stated he applied a formula based on the percentage of time 29 the association uses Southlake fields, and he believes it gives them the most flexibility on how 30 to assess the fee to their members. 31 32 Motion was made to approve the usage agreement with SGSA, with amendments as discussed, 33 and as proposed by staff. 34 35 Motion: White 36 Second: Glover 37 Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, Georgia, White 38 Nayes: None 39 Approved: 5-0 40 41 (Ms. Stokdyk was not present for this item.) 42 Motion carried. 43 44 Agenda Item OH, Revised Trail System Master Plan. 45 Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 7 of 11 N.•IParks & Recreation IBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc I Senior Parks Planner Chris Carpenter suggested that the Park Board provide as much 2 commentary tonight as possible on the draft plan to be included in the coming weeks for public 3 display and before it moves on the P&Z and City Council, though there is quite a bit of 4 information to digest. He introduced Bud Melton, from Bowman-Melton Associates, to discuss 5 the draft plan. 6 7 Mr. Melton described the background, history, planning process and recommendations in detail. 8 He specifically covered: 9 10 • visual assessment of roadways, terrain necessary to note opportunities 11 • establishing a bicycle level of service (LOS) for on-road bicycle system 12 • plan goals of identifying corridors for interconnectivity to key destinations and recreational 13 opportunity 14 • key terms and their meaning 15 16 Mr. Glover asked for Mr. Melton to describe the difference between walkways and trails, and 17 Mr. Melton said basically that this plan describes anything less than eight feet as a walkway, or 18 sidewalk, since the width is not such to accommodate two-way, "trail" traffic. This distinction 19 was not made in the prior plan. 20 21 Mr. Hugman noted that this discussion occurred with the Traffic Bond program, and the Council 22 agreed that 8 feet is a minimum "trail" width. Mr. Glover stated that the public may not 23 understand why we are proposing "sidewalks" in places, and not trails everywhere, since it is a 24 trail plan. Mr. Melton offered that, in those areas, mobility would be accomplished with a 25 combination of on- and off-street access, which isn't always a multi-use trail. Mr. Glover 26 suggested going with a title for the plan that indicated that not only trails were included. Staff 27 and the Board agreed. 28 29 Ms. Georgia recalled that some of this may be solved with signage that has previously been 30 discussed, which would show differing trail types, and what were sidewalks and/or bike routes. 31 Mr. Melton agreed and noted that there are both wayfinding signs as well as regulatory signs for 32 standard traffic control (i.e. for signed bike routes). 33 34 Mr. Nelson inquired as to what restrictions would be in place for the different types of trails. Mr. 35 Carpenter stated that since it is virtually impossible to impose and enforce restrictions on public 36 trails, the idea is more to not encourage inappropriate uses where the facilities couldn't handle it. 37 Mr. Nelson stated that he would like to see more definitive language to suggest which kinds of 38 trails are specifically for which types of uses; i.e., inform the public of what they should and 39 shouldn't be expecting to do on the trail. Mr. Carpenter noted that Ms. Berman had suggested 40 icons to denote what types of uses were appropriate, and some system such as that may be 41 developed in the future. 42 43 Continuing the presentation, Mr. Melton covered: 44 45 • increasing minimum trail curve radii to eliminate "wobble walks," or trails with sharp curves 46 Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 8 of 11 N.IParks & Recreation IBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc I (Lisa Stokdyk was now in attendance.) 2 3 Ms. Stokdyk asked about the definition and intent of the "cross-country" trails noted in the 4 executive summary, since that was not a legend entry. Mr. Melton stated that a couple of trails 5 are not connected to actual roadway right-of-way, and traverse through drainage areas, 6 undeveloped property, etc. He meant "cross-country" to imply the independence from a roadway 7 system. 8 9 Continuing the presentation, Mr. Melton noted: 10 11 • retail areas are rapidly establishing "pieces" of the system and the opportunities to connect 12 shouldn't be ignored 13 • the S.H. 114 corridor provides great mixed-use multi-use trail opportunities with future 14 development 15 • the Thoroughfare Plan is the major tool for trail implementation and adequate trail widths 16 should be reserved, as well as shoulder widths, pause areas, etc. 17 • level of service is a combination rating of traffic volume, speed and width, and secondary 18 factors 19 • which trails were removed because they basically had no logical origin and destination points 20 in the future 21 • how other cities' plans affected certain suggestions on this plan 22 • how the park survey results spoke highly of trails 23 • the potential for private trail systems to tie into the public system 24 • the preservation of the equestrian focus on all trails in and around Bob Jones and Lake 25 Grapevine 26 • the preservation of certain drainage corridors and key connections at TxDOT highway 27 improvements 28 29 Ms. Stokdyk inquired as to how trails may follow creek beds or drainage areas across existing 30 single family lots. Mr. Carpenter explained that, unless the drainage goes underground, the open 31 drainage channel is an opportunity for the city to acquire an additional set of rights, by purchase 32 or other agreement, to install pedestrian access through the drainage way. It all depends on the 33 amount of interest the city has in making those connections and the willingness of the property 34 owners; it is a negotiated process. Ms. Stokdyk noted that it would really depend on the impact 35 to the property. Mr. Carpenter agreed and stated that it is not the intent of the Trail Plan to place 36 undue burdens on property and to minimize intrusions, if any. Mr. Nelson asked if the city would 37 actually buy the property, rather than use an easement. Mr. Carpenter stated that it is not the 38 intent to condemn the property; pedestrian access easements would be preferable. Mr. Melton 39 added that this phenomenon, though new to Southlake in this plan, is fairly common in a 40 majority of other plans he has seen. 41 42 Mr. Melton continued the presentation, and questions were answered regarding TxDOT highway 43 plans, and Ms. Georgia suggested minor corrections to some of the map symbols. Mr. Melton 44 explained his terminology for the naming of the trails, and it was the consensus of the group, as 45 well as Julie Landesburg, an equestrian user in the audience, that the trail names, especially 46 around the lake, should be made more generic to denote location only. Ms. Landesburg Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 9 of 11 N.Warks & Recreation IBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc I commented that a simple naming convention may help with locating victims in emergency 2 situations. Mr. Melton continued by explaining the proposed types and uses of trails in and 3 around Bob Jones Park, as stated in the plan text. 4 5 Ms. White pointed out the various possible routes that are likely to be taken when the Sabre 6 campus is completed and the access is limited. Staff agreed with the suggestions to limit hike and 7 bike traffic in this area and the lack of necessity for this activity to go north. Mr. Melton 8 explained that the connection shown near the exiting Sabre building at T.W. King and Kirkwood 9 was to facilitate connectivity to the proposed major off-road trail on the north side of S.H. 114. 10 Mr. Nelson commented that inter-city connectivity should be attempted where possible, and Mr. 11 Melton agreed that it was a principle of the plan. 12 13 The Park Board noted that it is their desire to postpone action on this item until they can review 14 it in greater detail. The Park Board agreed to table this item until next meeting and provide Mr. 15 Carpenter with comments in the interim. 16 17 Peter Landesburg, 305 E. Bob Jones Road, noted that there was still an on-road bike path on the 18 proposed plan, and Mr. Melton agreed that that item should be removed. Staff noted this 19 correction. 20 21 Mr. Nelson requested that BMX facility possibilities be noted. Mr. Melton replied that was more 22 in the realm of the Park Plan update. Several board members commented that this type of 23 activity, as well as mountain biking, are very popular and need to be addressed, as well as 24 integrated into the park and trail system. Ms. Georgia, Ms. Berman, and Peter Landesburg 25 emphasized the need to make sure that bike uses and equestrian uses are separated. Ms. Georgia 26 emphasized that we should plan for these uses or risk being short-sighted. Mr. Hugman stated 27 that these types of activities, if designated, would best be addressed in the Parks Master Plan. 28 29 Mr. Melton finished going through the remainder of the suggestions in the southern portion of 30 the city as noted in the draft plan text. 31 32 A motion was made to table the Revised Trail System Master Plan until the March meeting. 33 34 Motion: Glover 35 Second: Stokdyk 36 Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, Stokdyk, White, Georgia 37 Nayes: None 38 Approved: 6-0 39 40 Motion carried. 41 42 Motion was made to adjourn at 9:30 p.m., forgoing the remainder of the reports, etc., on the 43 agenda. 44 45 Motion: Glover 46 Second: Georgia Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 10 of 11 N.IParks & Recreation lBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc I Ayes: Berman, Glover, Nelson, Stokdyk, White, Georgia 2 Nayes: None 3 Approved: 6-0 4 5 Motion carried. 6 7 8 9 10 L\ 11 S ry Berm Cha' 12 13 /f 14 15 Cara White, Secretary 16 17 18 19 20 21 Parks and Recreation Board Regular Meeting, January8, 2001 Page 11 of 11 N.Warks & Recreation IBOARDSIPKBOARDIMINUTES120011010801.doc