Loading...
08/18/2008 - Advisory Parks & Recreation CommissionAGENDA ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA WORKSHOP August 18, 2008 Regular meeting cancelled Workshop: 6:00 - 6:45 PM Eagan Municipal Center Conference Rooms 2 A&B 1. Alternative Funding Discussion - 2003 report enclosed II. Photos in Parks III. Public Art- Community Tile Mosaic IV. Intern Report - Tanya Beekman V. Communications and Department Happenings TOUR ¦ Civic Arena Mezzanine ¦ Softball at Northview ¦ Carlson Lake Park ¦ Patrick Eagan Park ¦ Thresher Fields Pages 1-26 6:00 - 6:45 pm Pages 27-30 Pages 31-33 Pages 34-37 Pages 38-42 6:45 - 8:00 pm The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, or status with regard to public assistance. Auxiliary aids for disabled persons wishing to participate are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance of the event. If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City will attempt to provide the aids. Next Advisory Parks Commission Meeting September 2008 ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION 2008-09 MEMBERS NAME AND ADDRESS TERM TELEPHONE TERM START EXPIRES THURSTON "THOR" ANDERSON 2008 651-688-8157 (H) 5/2010 1658 Mallard Drive (2 yr. 2008) 651-687-8804 (W) Eagan, MN 55122 thoranderson(7a yahoo.com (H) thurston.anderson thomsonreuters.com W PHIL BELFIORI 2002 651-905-0293 (H) 5/2009 3671 Canary Way (lyr. 2002) 651-266-9112 (W) Eagan, MN 55123 (3 yr, 2003) (3 yr, 2006) 651-230-2051 (cell) Phil. Belfiori ci.st aul.mn.us JENNIFER DAHLQUIST 2007 651-994-8080 (H) 5/2010 3885 Gibraltar Trail (1 yr. 2007) 612-626-1602 (W) Eagan, MN 55123 (2 yr, 2008) Jeffnerl5@hotmail.com BRUCE GOFF (Alternate) 2008 651-686-7170 (H) 5/2009 782 Mill Run Path (1 yr. 2008) 952-833-8183 (W) Eagan, MN 55123 Bruce.ooff(acomcast.net LAURIE HALVERSON (Secretary) May, 2006 651-249-9245(Cell) 5/2009 680 Brockton Circle (1 yr, 2006) 651-686-0183 (H) Eagan, MN 55123 (2 yr, 2007) Ihalverson@cointernet.com DUANE L. HANSEN May, 2004 952-894-9228 (W) 5/2010 3911 Denmark Ave (1 yr. 2004) 651-687-9566 (H) Eagan, MN 55123 (3 yr. 2005) dlhansen(@Q.com (2 yr, 2008) DOROTHY PETERSON (Chair) 2000 651-454-6532 (H) 5/2009 4337 Sequoia Drive (3 yr. 2000) Eagan, MN 55122 (3 yr. 2003) norsk4337(a iuno.com (3 yr, 2006) RYAN ZIPF (Vice Chair) 2005 651-686-2958 (H) 5/2009 4721 Pebble Beach Way (1 yr. 2005) 651-281-1275 (W) Eagan, MN 55123 (3 yr, 2006) rziof(@..Imnc.org M..w: ,;:c-rr <akll?e"_•r ?n.- - 5xur+Mk. _ __?.:r?Y?-;.rte.-?n`CP?rw:;+?-: 1..-. NR,.rdi1P%3i:?wW ?. Eagan City Staff E-Mail: isiohnson@cityofeagan.com cmesko@cityofeagan.com poison@cityofeagan.com ahove@cityofeagan.com emacbeth@cityofeagan.com 7-30-08 Phone #651-675-5505 (Cherryl's # after 4:30 p.m.) Eagan Parks and Recreation Phone Number: 651-675-5500 Eagan Parks and Recreation Staff E-Mail Director Juli Seydell Johnson js?ohnson@cityofeagan.com Administration: Cherry! Mesko cmesko@cityofeagan.com Paul Olson polson@cityofeagan.com Paula Nowariak pnowariak@)cityofeagan.com Sonya Rippe srippe@cityofeagan.corn Forestry: Gregg Hove ghove@cityofeagan.com Water Resources: Eric Macbeth ernacbeth@cityofeagan.com ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION 2008-2009 MEETING SCHEDULE NAME May 19 Jun 16 No mtg July 14 Aug 18 Work Shop only Sept 15 Oct 20 Nov 17 Dec 15 Jan 15 Thurs Feb 12 Thurs Mar 17 Apr 14 Thor Anderson x X 0* Phil Belfiori x X Jennifer Dahiquist x X Bruce Goff (Alternate) 0* X Laurie Halverson x X Duane Hansen x X Dorothy Peterson x x Ryan Zipf X 0* X = present 0 = absent O* = notified staff of absence prior to meeting Recreation Sub-Committee Natural Resources Sub-Committee Acquisition/ Ryan Zipf Phil Belfiori Development Sub-Committee Jennifer Dahiquist Duane Hansen Dorothy Peterson Thor Anderson Laurie Halverson UPCOMING MEETINGS: OPEN ISSUES: August 18: Workshop and Tour- No regular meeting II • Carriage Hills Update • Photography in Parks ¦ Alternative Funding Working Draft 03-25-03 INTRODUCTION EAGAN DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS During the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, the City of Eagan shifted from a mostly-rural farming community to a commercial/ industrial powerhouse in the Metro market. Residential development increased exponentially, and with that growth came the demand for parks and open space. Since the earliest days of development, the City of Eagan has required a parks dedication and trails dedication from developers. This is a common practice in the State of Minnesota; it ensures that the City will not become a paved-over concrete nightmare where trees are merely memories. Developers have been required to dedicate a portion of land to the City for parks, or submit a payment-in-lieu that would be earmarked specifically for park development. The trails dedication fee is meant for neighborhoods to connect to the boulevard trail system, allowing alternative methods of transportation and easy access to parks. This dedication can be fulfilled by the developer's installation of a trail segment that adheres to the City's Comprehensive Trail Plan or, if a trail segment is not feasible in the development, payment of a cash dedication. Trails dedication fees are not tied in to the Park Site Fund the way parks dedication fees are. Park Site Fund monies are used specifically for parks projects, including those identified by the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). They are not used for routine maintenance. Each year the CIP is reviewed for relevance and budgeting purposes, and to identify when large projects will require time, staff resources can be allocated accordingly. PARKS DEDICATION FEES During the time of heavy development, the City received heavy doses of Parks Dedication funds and land dedications each year. The funds and land dedications helped increase the number of City parks to 54, and enhanced the existing facilities by exploring new recreational options for residents and evolving as new activities emerged. Each year, the Advisory Parks Commission (APrC) reviews its fees and adjusts them to keep up with land value, and to remain fair within the metro market. The APrC reviews parks dedication fees and trail dedication fees as separate entities rather than one single fee, a rather unique occurrence in the Metro area. Many cities put these fees together. But since parks dedication fees are based on land values and trails dedication fees are based on material costs, Eagan keeps them separate. Toward the end of the 1990s and early 2000s, development decreased relative to the declining rate of available lands. By 2002, the Eagan Comprehensive Plan estimates that the city is well over 90% built out, the remaining lands being privately held or of such terrain that development is difficult. Development review trends are shown in Chart A. Chart A: Number of Development Items Reviewed by APrC, 1987-2002 100 - 90 80 70 60 E a 50 O 40.- 30 - C) li 20 - 10- 0- 86 73 57 57 4 j 5 _-W 46 47 34 34 3 6 32 __7 ?: 24 3 19 16 17 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 The slowdown in development has greater implications than just a plateau in the economic development realm; it also means a slowdown in the amount of parks dedication fees the City is receiving per annum. These fees have been the Park Site Fund's primary income factor for many years, and when the income stops, other methods of income will need to take its place; sustainable, long-term income sources that will sustain the parks for generations to come. As development slows down, income to the Park Site Fund will decrease. Investigation of supplemental sources of income to the fund will help the City avoid depletion of the fund. Such a study will allow them to maintain the high standard for the park system that residents have come to expect. The APrC has been challenged to find revenue sources outside Park Dedication Fees to supplement the Park Site Fund. During workshop sessions, they have come up with the ideas that comprise each section of this report. Each idea has been analyzed for potential income. Additional factors such as political and philosophical pros and cons have not been analyzed at this stage. Several issues may need to be reviewed by the City Attorney's office before pursuing. 2 POTENTIAL PARK DEDICATION REVENUE Each year the APrC reviews parks dedication fees to determine whether it is appropriate to increase fees. Fees are tied inherently to the market value of the land, and fairness in the Metro market. Parks dedication fees have been increasing slightly over the past years as land values increase, an average of about 9% in the past seven years. This option is based on a continuation of this trend; increasing park dedication fees even as development applications are declining. It is important to note that this can not be considered a sustainable revenue source. This would serve as a "Band-Aid" method of revenue generation until a new, sustainable method can be implemented. BASE DATA- RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT As of May 23, 2002, the base residential unit count was 25,105. This does not include the permits pending and additional housing units pending final approval. Table 1 shows the building permits pending and additional housing units pending final approval through May of 2002. Table 1: Permits and Units Pending, through May 2002 It is important to note that the building permits pending have already been charged parks dedication fees and will not be included in projections. However, the units awaiting final approval have not yet been charged, and will be used in further projections. Projections are based on two key assumptions, using a 2020 buildout scenario: Scenario 1 • 100% of vacant land will be developed by 2020. • 25% low density (LD) underutilized land will be developed by 2020 • 50% of medium density and high density (MD/HD) underutilized land will be developed by 2020. Scenario 2 • 100% of vacant land will be developed by 2020. • 35% of low density (LD) underutilized land will be developed by 2020. 3 75% of medium density and high density (MD/HD) underutilized land will be developed by 2020. Using these base figures, the Planning Department created the following projections, shown in Table 2. Planning's projections indicate that under Scenario 1, the number of developed housing units would increase to 27,569, and under Scenario 2, the number of units would increase to 27,790. These figures assume that all final plats currently before the city's commissions are approved. Table 2: 2001 Building Projections Vacant Scenario I Underused Total Vacant Scenario 2 Underused Total LD 448 365 813 448 511 959 MD 144 53 197 144 79 223 HD 65 98 163 65 147 212 Total 657 516 1173 657 737 1394 Using the housing units pending approval in Table 1 and the building projections in Table 2, the total projected amount of additional housing can be calculated (Table 3). Table 3: Residential Projections, Including Units Pending Final Approval LD Projected Scenario 1 813 Scenario 2 959 MD Projected 277 303 HD Projected 356 405 Total Projected 1446 1667 The next step is determining the rate of buildout per annum. To do this, the assumption of a steady annual build rate is applied. Two alternatives are examined, the first, a rate of development that would result in a buildout by 2010, the other a rate of development to achieve buildout in 2020. There are clearly flaws in the logic; most notably the rate of build is not likely to be steady, and it is entirely possible that variable economic conditions may prevent total buildout by either of those years, or they may happen rapidly. To determine a rudimentary analysis, however, this conundrum will be set aside so the APrC can visualize what they may see as future income. 4 APPLICATION OF SCENARIOS 1 AND 2 TO PARKS DEDICATION REVENUE Tables 4 and 5 illustrate possible buildout for 2010 or 2020, assuming a steady build rate based on the scenarios presented on page 16. Since park dedication fees are based per unit, Tables 6 and 7 show potential cumulative long-range income based on steady dedication fee rate increases for the specified time frame. Fee projections are based on 2002 park dedication fees, as 2003 fees had not yet been approved at the time of projection calculation (note: 2003 rate increase of 5% was approved by Council on Decemberl7, 2002). These projections assume that all developable land in residential zones is developed into residential units; no rezoning is done. Because of fluctuations in development rates, annual projections are not applicable. The projections submitted in Tables 6 and 7 illustrate a cumulative income, which would be distributed unevenly each fiscal year. Table 4: Scenario 1 Projected Residential Unit Buildout Scenario 1 1 LD 2010 102 per year 2020 45 per year MD 35 per year 15 per year HD 45 per year 20 per year Total Projected Buildout 182 per year 80 per year Table 5: Scenario 2 Projected Residential Unit Buildout Scenario 2 LD 2010 120 per year 2020 53 per year MD 38 per year 17 per year HD 51 per year 23 per year Total Projected Buildout 209 per year 93 per year Table 6: Residential Potential Long-Range Park Dedication Fee Income Rate of Increase Per Annum Scenario I Scen IL ario 2 L 0% 2,153,352 2,153,352 2,485,543 2,485,543 5% 2,698,840 3,468,722 3,115,182 4,078,915 10% 3,386,005 5,761,394 3,908,354 6,926,254 15% 4,249,059 9,780,979 4,904,549 12,042,706 20% 5,329,251 16,829,186 6,151,378 21,229,299 25% 6,676,016 29,137,066 7,705,905 37,636,058 30% 8,348,276 50,476,697 9,636,139 66,691,735 Table 7: Commercial/ Industrial Potential Long-Range Park Dedication Fee Income Rate of Increase Per Annum Scenario I Scenario 2 0% 1,261,256 1,418,913 1,448,863 1,629,971 5% 1,580,759 2,328,516 1,815,890 2,674,873 10% 1,983,243 3,953,967 2,278,243 4,542,104 15% 2,488,749 6,874,778 2,858,941 7,897,374 20% 3,121,436 12,119,097 3,585,738 13,921,764 25% 3,910,261 21,485,168 4,491,897 24,681,000 30% 4,889,733 38,072,083 5,617,061 43,735,152 Figures based on 2002-2010, or 2002-2020 scenarios. 2002 SURVEY SUMMARY In June of 2002, staff distributed a survey in Minnesota and nationwide to determine some of the creative ways other municipalities have found to provide funding to their parks projects. The survey covered current funding practices, plans and strategies for long term sustainable funding, and their power to impose a levy. There was a rather low rate of response; 165 surveys were distributed, but the response rate was only 20%, still considered a "good" return in the statistic field. It might be deducted that cities did not respond to the survey because they do not have a plan for alternative funding. Or the 132 cities who did not respond simply did not have time to do so before the deadline. Survey findings conclude that most cities do not have long-range plans for sustainable funding sources. The following is a synopsis of the individual questions asked in the survey: 90.6% of total respondents were stand-alone municipal entities rather than park of a Park District. 2. 69.7% collect a Parks and Trail dedication fee in the same manner that the City of Eagan does- a payment-in-lieu from developers. 27.7% of respondents fund parks projects via General Fund. 23.4% use other methods such as grants, state lotteries, CDBG, or liquor store revenues. 21.3% use bonds, levies, or taxes. 4. 47.1% of respondents note their primary funding source is a combination of General Fund allotment and user fees. 32.4% state the General Fund is the sole income. 5. Respondents who indicated they have a long-range financial strategy generally indicate they have a generalized section in their parks plan that addresses funding, but does not specify revenue sources. Several indicated their CIP as a long range strategy, but while CIPs generally budget money going out, they rarely identify where money is coming from. Others such as Kansas City have imposed a'/2 cent tax. However, this is not an option for Eagan, given the limited powers of Eagan's APrC. Survey results strongly indicate that cities do not have strategic planning documents to identify income for parks projects. It is clear that trying to develop a concrete plan for future funding is an unusual venture. Thus, every idea generated by the APrC must undergo scrutiny, for one might yield significant funding potential. 7 OPTION: PURSUE TAX LEVY MONEY The state has again imposed levy limits on Minnesota municipalities. Income is distributed to the major municipal services per their current year budget. Chart B illustrates the distribution of the 2002 monies; as of this writing, the 2003 budget had yet to be approved. Of the 2002 distribution, 79.6% of 2002 tax income was funneled into the General Fund, further distributed to specific sources, primarily public safety, general government, public works, and parks and recreation. The funds that go toward Parks and Recreation include human resources, parts and supplies, services and related charges, capital outlay (non-CIP related, more necessary maintenance issues), merchandise for resale, and forestry. Chart B: 2002 Eagan City Budget Equipment Special General Revolving Assessments Facilities Major Street Fund, 4.2 on City Renewal/ Construction, - P erty, 0.4 Replacement, 6.0 0.6 Community Center/ Central Park, 9.2 General Fund, 79.6 The option presented by the APrC would increase the distribution to Parks and Recreation for capital use shown in the smaller portion of Chart B. A new system of budgeting would require CIP items to be included in the regular budget. Building Maintenance ,2.7 Public Works 15.0 Parks ands Recreation, 15.1 Contingency, 1.2 An increase in Parks and Recreation funds derived from the General Fund would decrease the amount spent on other services, a shift in how the "pie pieces" are distributed. This could present some difficulties in the current political climate. 8 Possible Income Numeric income projections are not feasible due to the shift in funding systems and Council discretion. It would be considered part of the General Fund allotment rather than a separate entity, and could be variable annually, or a fixed number with an inflationary adjustment. Funding amounts would be subject to Council's discretion. 9 OPTION: MANDATORY WATER UTILITY "ROUND UP" The idea behind the water utility "round up" is a conversion of water bills into whole dollars, then extracting the remainder into a separate account for parks projects. METHODOLOGY Projections were based on the number of 2002 REF units. A random sampling was done to determine approximate income for the following reasons: • There are over 18,200 REF units to examine. There is no software at this time to estimate the "small change" amounts on each bill; this would need to be done manually. • The City's Utility Billing division provided samples from a wide variety of land uses and bill amounts. Whole dollars were irrelevant to the examination; the discussion has always focused on using the small change amounts. First, a utility bill round-up was estimated if the cents were rounded to the nearest .10. Using the sample utility bills, rounding each of them up to the nearest .10, the average income was .07 per bill. This was multiplied by an estimated 18,300 REF accounts to generate an income of $1,278.41 per billing cycle. Multiply by 4 to represent quarterly billing, and the income generated from a. 10 round-up is approximately $5,113.65 per annum. See Table 8 for a condensed version of the three scenarios. Next, the round-up was estimated to the nearest.50. Averaging the potential contribution from the sample, the average income per bill was .28. Multiplied by 18,300 REF accounts, this generates $5,062.55 per billing cycle. Annually, this would contribute $20,250.22. The final scenario tested was a round-up to the nearest $1.00. The average contribution, from the sample bills, would be .54 per bill. Each billing period, this would generate $9,798.08. Annually, this would generate $39,192.32. Table 8: Potential Annual Income, RniindPd to nParPst 5 10 S, 5n anti TO 0.10 0.50 IS Average .07 .28 .54 18,300 REF 1 278.41 062.55 5 9,798.08 accounts , , Annually 5,113.65 20,250.22 39,192.32 Equity First and foremost, the question of fairness must be asked. If a system such as this is imposed, account holders will be paying different amounts than their neighbors. For example on a $1 round-up, if Mr. X's bill is $36.12, and Ms. Y's bill is $36.95, Mr. X will end up paying .88, while Ms. Y only pays .05. 10 Technology and Administrative Costs Right now, the City does not have software to automatically deduct and track a rounded up contribution. This would require staff time to review the individual bills and send the appropriate amount to its destination. Current staff would need to be supplemented, as the Water Utility Billing clerks are already full time, regular employees with 8 hours worth of business each day already. An entry level clerical position at Eagan generally earns $25,000 per year. When you deduct this cost from the potential earnings generated from a rounded-up source, it reduces the benefits significantly. Table 9: Potential Annual Income minus Administrative Cost Average I. .07 0.50 .28 'I .54 18,300 REF accounts 1,278.41 5,062.55 9,798.08 Annually 5,113.65 20,250.22 39,192.32 Starting Clerical Salary 25,000 25,000 25,000 Potential Income (-19,886.35) (-4,749.78) 14,192.32 Table 9 illustrates that the costs of hiring one staff person to accommodate this method of revenue generation would reduce, and even negate, the benefits of its income. It would be difficult to justify obtaining the salary from another source, as the reason this person would be hired is to track the round-up. 11 OPTION: PARK FEE ON WATER BILL This option would impose a flat fee on each water utility bill during its quarterly distribution. The idea behind it is to create an unbiased, equitable way for each utility customer to contribute a flat rate, much in the way the supplemental fee for storm drainage is handled. This is not a new concept. A fee for storm water drainage has been applied for several years. Since 1998, the City has received an average of $664,000 per year from this source. Table 10 shows the revenue produced from this storm water drainage fee. Table 10: 2002 Eagan City Budget 1998 1999 2000 2001 20022 REF Accounts 17,256 17,578 17,987 18,211 18,298 Fee/ Rate' 5.73 5.90 6.08 6.26 6.57 R-3 rate 4.58 4.72 4.86 5.01 5.26 Revenue 710,683 756,393 801,233 838,091 213,318 (1) All charges are quarterly (2) Figures for first quarter of 2002 only REF Accounts vs. REF units Calculations in this section are based on two properties, REF accounts vs. REF units. REF, or Residential Equivalency Factor, is a way to "level the playing field" by evaluating the amount of impact a property would have on stormwater services. For example, a single-family residence, with their house as the only account, has an REF unit of 1. However, a large commercial facility, with much greater impact on the stormwater system due to impervious parking areas, has one REF account, but 200 REF units, because that one account holder contributes 200 times the amount of stormwater to the system than the single family residential unit Projections, REF Accounts Since 1998, the number of REF accounts has increased an average of 1.5%. From this, future numbers of REF accounts were projected by adding 1.5% to the current number of accounts for each calendar year. The projection assumes a building cap of 2005, based on projections from the Planning Department. This figure, as all figures in this study, is meant to be conservative. Table 11 uses 2002 REF account totals as the calculation basis. These could fluctuate based on growth or vacancy of accounts. This model assumes that the R-3 rate is the same as all other REF account rates. 12 Since bills are distributed quarterly, the formula used to base projections is: X= ((S*.015) + S)*4 Whereas S= Single Charge for Base Year (2002, 2003, 2004 progressively) Table 11: Projected Annual Income from Utility Bill Supplemental Fee Single X4 Billing Fee Charge, Cycles 2003 00- 00 2002 (2002) $1 18,298 73,192 74,290 75,404 76,535 $2 36,596 146,384 148,580 150,808 153,071 $3 54,894 219,576 222,870 226,213 229,606 $4 73,192 292,768 297,160 301,617 306,141 $5 91,490 365,960 371,449 377,021 382,676 $6 109,788 439,152 445,739 452,425 459,212 $7 128,086 512,344 520,029 527,830 535,747 $8 146,384 585,536 594,319 603,234 612,282 $9 164,682 658,728 668,609 678,638 688,818 $10 182,980 731,920 742,899 754,042 765,353 The City needs to identify whether these charges would apply exclusively to residential units as primary park users, or if it would include commercial and industrial accounts as well. This determination could alter the above projections. They also need to determine whether the charge applies to each account vs. each unit, for example an R-3 dwelling where there's one account but several units. A charge per unit may increase the potential income. Projections, REF Units According to LOGIS database systems, there are 30,924 total REFs for the city's Storm Drain account. If each REF unit were charged, rather than one charge toward the account holder, the numbers increase dramatically. The methodology used in Table 12 is the same, the difference is in the base figure used to generate the data. 13 Table 12: Projected Annual Income from Supplemental Water Utility Bill Fee Fee Single X4 11 Charge 11 11• 11 $1 30,924 123,696 125,551 127,435 129,346 $2 61,848 247,392 251,103 254,869 258,692 $3 92,772 371,088 376,654 382,304 388,039 $4 123,696 494,784 502,206 509,739 517,385 $5 154,620 618,480 627,757 637,174 646,731 $6 185,544 742,176 753,309 764,608 776,077 $7 216,468 865,872 878,860 892,043 905,424 $8 247,392 989,568 1,004,412 1,019,478 1,034,770 $9 278,316 1,113,264 1,129,963 1,146,912 1,164,116 $10 309,240 1,236,960 1,255,514 1,274,347 1,293,462 Le a1i The City Attorney's office was asked to check in to the legality of imposing a fee on the water utility bills for parks and natural resources. Preliminary discussion with the City Attorney has indicated that statutes do not support supplemental fees on water utility bills for non-water related purposes. 14 OPTION: CHARITABLE GAMBLING PROCEEDS The option of imposing a contribution from licensed charitable gambling organizations is not a new concept. Many cities in the area currently do so. State statute allows municipalities to collect a 10% contribution on net gambling profits. The City of Eagan does not currently collect this contribution. It was noted at the workshop session of October 2, 2002 that some Eagan athletic organizations operate pull tabs within the city. The State Gambling Control Board lists Eagan Hockey Association and Eagan High School Football Boosters as licensed gambling operations by the state, but neither organization has recently renewed a city license, and no reports have been received by these groups in recent years. Thus their proceeds can not be included in this study. Administration staff is following up on this discrepancy and this section of the report will be amended. Using the three organizations that are licensed, operate, and properly submit gambling reports to the City, some speculative figures were projected as to possible income. The projections are based on operations remaining approximately at status quo, all three organizations renewing their licenses, no significant loss in gambling profits per annum. Chart C shows the charitable gambling income generated by each of the three licensed organizations operating in Eagan. The Knights of Columbus, operating out of 2 sites, generated approximately $104,046.50 in 2001. Eagan Lions, operating out of 1 Chart C: 2001 Total Charitable Gambling Income site, generated approximately $78,375.77. Mendota Heights Athletic Med Hts Athl Organization, operating out of 3 sites, Assoc, 62,050. - Eagan Lions, earned $62,050 in 2001. 2001 totals 78,375.77 were used as the last full fiscal year. The total net proceeds earned by the three organizations totals $244,472.27. If the City were to require the 10% contribution allowable by law, this would give the City approximately $24,400 per annum, should the market remain status quo. Knights of Columbus, 104, 046.50 When gambling reports from the Eagan Hockey Association and Eagan High School Football Boosters are turned in, these numbers will be adjusted. Given the amount of revenue generated by the organizations, the question is whether the Parks and Recreation Department could operate a legal gambling game for its own purposes. The answer is no, the state Gambling Control Board prohibits municipalities from operating legal gambling operations. The only revenues from gaming a city can legally collect are those that are contributed from licensed organizations. 15 Market Fluctuations However, history has proven that one cannot depend on the status quo. There will be some years when interest in pull tabs is low, some years where it is high. Licenses may or may not be renewed, new organizations may request licenses, and established ones may pull out of gaming. However, for the purposes of projection in Table 13, it will be assumed that the three existing operations remain intact. Table 13 shows the possibility of fluctuation in Table 13: ± Fluctuations in gambling proceeds. If the populace simply decides not Gambling. ± Fluctuation/ Income -55% 10,800 -50% 12,000 -45% 13,200 -40% 14,400 -35% 15,600 -30% 16,800 -25% 18,000 -20% 19,200 -15% 20,400 -10% 21,600 -5% 22,800 -2% 23,520 0 24,000 2% 24,480 5% 25,200 10% 26,400 15% 27,600 20% 28,800 25% 30,000 30% 31,200 35% 32,400 40% 33,600 45% 34,800 50% 36,000 55% 37,200 to play, or the organization decides to reduce the amount of gaming it offers, a reduction in income is possible. It is important to note that projections are only speculative. Income levels will change with market shifts. Some years may see lower income as public interest in gambling wanes, or licenses aren't renewed, and some years may see an increase as more people play the games or more licenses are granted. Fluctuations should be anticipated. 16 OPTION: CHARGE PUBLIC WORKS FOR UTILITY EASEMENTS IN PARKS This option would implement a charge for utility easements that run through Eagan's 54 parks. Parks vary in their utility amenities, some have storm water easements only, some have combinations of storm, sanitary, and sewer. Each easement takes up land space. Methodology The first hurdle to overcome is the issue of easement declaration. Park utilities historically have not been declared "easements" unless the easement was in place before the city acquired the land. Thus, any utility, sewer, drainage, or sanitary line that was installed after the City acquired the park is not considered an easement. Easements can not be declared retroactively. Thus, the investigation took a new approach. The first step was to review the easement file book against the 1/2 section utility maps provided by Engineering. These maps indicate the proper easement files to investigate. However, easement documents do not specify when an easement crosses one parcel into another, and did not yield the proper land data for this study. However, many of the City's easements have been converted into AutoCAD data. The data on AutoCAD details when an easement crosses parcel lines, and the land area used. The City is currently in the process of converting easement data into AutoCAD and ArcView. Because the conversion is still in progress, AutoCAD data.is only available for 22.9% of the easements known to lie within park boundaries (see Table 14). An initial scan of easement documents indicates approximately 11.785 known acres of easement encroachment, or 513,354 known square feet of utility, sewer, or drainage easements within the park system. To determine whether charging for easements would yield a significant cash flow, three scenarios were projected to give a conservative estimate of how much more parkland might be used for easements. Conservative projections were made to account for easements not delineated in AutoCAD, increasing the land area of easements 25 to 200% (with only 22.9% of easement data, it is unreasonable to pinpoint a tighter range). 17 Table 14: Known Park Easements and Document Numbers Easment Park iDescription Acreage Doc Used in Park. 2 67607 Lexington Utility, drainage 9 ,.. 1153596 .. ... 1Central .... ... Water wells and mains .... .... .206 acres .. 9 397403 QQuarry Utility 9 395287 Quarry Sewer ........... 9 .. ., . ........ 395288 ..... .... Quarry ........ Sewer .......... 11 331067 (9) .. . _... .... North Pathway, drainage, utility ...... 11 378236 North Utility { 11 ... .... 370458 Worth License, drainage, utility ..... ._ 15 594107 .. O'Leary Utility _ ....................................... .135 acres 15 653204 ..... O'Leary ........ .................. .................. .......................................................... 15 387963 Fish ................ ............. . Utility ......... .................... .......: 17 309775 Skr Hill ROW & utility 20 337103 Woodhaven Sewer trunk line 23 827006 Bridle Ridge Utility 288 acres 23 ........ 765523 ........ _ .......... Bridle Ridge ..... . Ponding, utility 26 619441 Oak Pond Utility .046 acres 26 593659 Oak Pond Utility 034 acres 26 No Number Schwanz ............................ 27 ..... ........... _. .._..... 593656 ......... ...... Walnut Hill 27 1231778 !Lex-Dill Driveway for Caponi .260 acres 27 404402 Carlson Lk ........ ................. ......................... 27 632937 Clearwater Drainage, utility lines 28 403026 Heine Pond Utility 28 ... ... ........ 550013 ..... .... Thomas Lk ..... . ..... .... _................. ................. _ .. ...... .......... 10.895 28 454021 .... ...... ,Highline Utility ... ...... 29 409629 Highline Sanitary ...... ... ..... 29 624798 ;Highline 29 409628 .......................... Hi9hline ............................ ................... ........... . . ........ 30 ....... 542847 ....... ..... ......._. Pond Utility 30 574744 ............... `Cinnamon Utility line ... .040 ..... ........ 31 544930 ................. .__ ............ Kettle ......... ......... .... .............. 33 100625 Walden Hts Utility --- - -------- 33 523582 Walden Hts Utility 33 . 487307 ... ...... [Pond Utility ........ ... .... 33 89358 ond Drainage utility 18 For easement acreage not available, three scenarios were created. First, the total acreage was multiplied by a high, medium, and low estimate to create "Possible additional easement acreage in parks." The current known area is 11.785 acres, or 513,354 square feet. • High Scenarios: Additional 150% to 200% of total known acreage. This scenario assumes that there are approximately 29.5 to 35.4 acres of easements in City parks that have not yet been converted to AutoCAD. Table 15 shows potential total acreage and square feet in three steps. Medium Scenarios: Additional 75% to 125% of total known acreage. This scenario assumes that there is approximately 20.6 to 26.5 acres of easements in City parks that have not yet been converted to AutoCAD. Table 16 shows the potential land area possible in this scenario. Low Scenarios: Additional 25% to 50% of total known average. This scenario assumes that there is approximately 14.7 to 17.7 acres of easements in City parks that have not yet been converted to AutoCAD. Table 17 shows the potential land area for this scenario. Table 16: Medium Scenario Table 17: Low Scenario • Square Scenario Acreage Feet +50% 17.7 770,031.9 +25% 14.7 641,693.3 Using these scenarios, potential income can be estimated. Table 18 shows possible income based on the three scenarios, at a variety of fee levels. 19 Table 15: High Scenario Table 18: Potential Income Generated by Easement Fee per Square Foot F Low Scenario Medium Scenario High Scenario ee per S 25% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% quare Foot 641,693 sq ft 770,031 sq ft 898,370 sq ft 1,026,709 sq ft 1,155,047 sq ft 1,283,386 sq ft 1,411,725 sq ft 1,540,063 sq ft $.25 160,423.25 192,507.75 224,592.50 256,677.25 288,761.75 320,846.50 352,931.25 385,015.75 $.50 320,846.50 385,015;50 449,185.00 513,354.50 577,52150 641,693.00 705,862.50 770,031.50 $.75 481,269.75 577,523.25 673,777.50 770,031.75 866,285.25 962,539.50 1,058,793.75 1,155,047.25 $1 641,693 770,031 898,370 1,026,709 1,155,047 1,283,386 1,411,725 1,540,063 $2 1,283,386 1,540,062 1,796.740 2,053,418 2,310;094 2,566,772 2,823,450 3,080,126 $3 1,925,079 2,310,093 2,695,110 3.080,127 3,465,141 3,850,158 4,235,175 4,620,189 $4 2,566,772 3,080,124 3,593.480 4,106,836 4,620,188 5,133,544 5,646,900 6,160,252 $5 3,208,465 3,850,155 4,491,850 5,133,545 5,775,235 6,416,930 7,058,625 7,700,315 $6 3,850,158 4,620,186 5,390,220 6,160,254 6,930,282 7,700,316 8,470,350 9,240,378 $7 4,491,851 5,390,217 6,288,590 7.186,963 8,085,329 8,983,702 9,882,075 10,780,441 $8 5,133,544 6,160,248 7,186,960 8.213,672 9,240,376 10,267,088 11,293,800 12,320,504 $9 5,775,237 6,930,279 8,085,330 9,240,381 10,395,423 11,550,474 12,705,525 13,860,567 $10 6,416,930 7,700,310 8,983,700 10,267,090 11,550,470 12,833,860 14,117,250 15,400,630 F The options presented represent one fiscal year. Does not account for fee increases or other fluctuations. 20 Table 18 demonstrates that even at .25 per square foot, there may be a positive inflow of dollars to the Park Site Fund. Public Works will almost certainly start charging for utilities in the parks to recover some of these expenses, which will decrease the earnings. These have not historically been charged to the Parks and Recreation department, and this will need to be accounted for in to the potential benefits. 21 OPTIONS REVIEWED, DEEMED "NOT FEASIBLE" Park Tax- Although revenue from a sales or gasoline tax would be substantial, there is no provision by law for municipal parks entities to implement such a tax exclusively for parks purposes. A Park District, such as those in Hennepin County or Chicago have such authority, but the City of Eagan Park and Recreation Department does not have the authority to levy such a tax by itself solely for parks purposes. Volunteer "Check Off" on Utility Bill- This method would allow citizens to volunteer funds by marking a box on the return portion of their utility bill, indicating they would like to donate to city parks. It would be similar to the Wildlife Fund check off found on Minnesota income tax forms. There are several logistic problems with this, particularly as e-commerce technology changes. With the advent of automatic bill pay, residents will have their bills automatically deducted from their banking accounts without having to send anything back to the city. The City of Roseville has noted a 20% participation in such a program, which has generated "A few thousand." Administratively, tracking the program may eat up a great deal of this income in staff and time spent on the project, leaving little benefit from a great deal of effort. SUMMARY It is clear that there is no single source of funding that will permanently solve the dilemma of declining income. Grants will be pursued, dollars will continue to be carefully evaluated, and the CIP will be reviewed each year for pertinence and feasibility. The conclusion of this analysis does not mean the topic has exhausted itself. The APrC and staff will need to be vigilant about investigating potential sources of income. As the years go by, there may be technological or creative opportunities that are not available at this time. Inspiration and creativity have unusual sources, and a random thought from someone may inspire yet another idea for revenue. 22 4kwl GItu of eocon MEMO To: Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and Recreation CC: Paul Olson, Superintendent of Parks FROM: Beth A. Wielde, Parks Research and Special Projects DATE: October 20, 2003 RE: APrC Findings- Alternative Funding Study COUNCIL CHARGE In recognition that funding through parks and trail dedication would not sustain the parks system indefinitely, Council charged the Advisory Parks Commission (APrC) with identifying alternative revenue streams for the Park Site Fund. In June of 2002, the APrC began a series of workshops to brainstorm ideas and determine which of these ideas would bring a continuous stream of funds to support parks projects. METHODOLOGY The APrC received the findings of a survey conducted nationwide to see what methods other communities with high buildout rates used to fund their parks projects. Survey results indicated that aside from user fees, General Fund contributions, and bonds, the 33 respondents had no long-range planning strategy for sustaining revenue sources. It became clear that Eagan was pioneering a study of this sort. The survey was also notable for the low response rate. 117 surveys had been distributed, 48 in Minnesota, 117 nationwide. The low response rate may indicate that people felt the survey asking about creative funding methods just didn't apply to them. Learning of the disappointing results of the survey, the APrC workshop participants brainstormed any idea that could possibly generate revenue for the Park Site Fund. Out of this first pool of ideas, the APrC identified 10 that they wanted to discuss further. These items were: • Park tax • Volunteer "Check Off' on utility bills • Volunteerism • Adopt-A-Park programs • Tax levy funds • Mandatory water utility "round up" • Park renewal/replacement fee on water bills • Charitable gambling proceeds • Increase park dedication fees • Charge the Public Works department for utility easements in parks Some of the ideas were discussed and were determined as not feasible as a sustainable revenue source. The APrC then challenged staff to create projections of potential revenue from the sources that seemed to be sustainable. Investigation into the items that were considered "potential" revenue sources found that each idea, while having merit, had some inherent problems: • Park tax: Impose a tax from sales of goods such as gasoline or similar. Since the APrC has no authority to impose a tax, this idea was immediately deemed "not feasible." • Volunteer "Check Off" on utility bills: When checking with another city who has implemented this program, it was clear that this does not generate substantial revenue. Roseville says that this system has generated "a few thousand dollars" a year and about 20% participation for their parks system. The APrC determined that this, along with administrative costs of tracking such a system, would not sustain CIP projects. • Tax levy funds: While dedicating a portion of the tax levy is desirable, concern was brought up about the distribution of funds, and why parks CIP projects should be funded from the General Fund. Because of levy limits, this would mean a decrease in funding available to fund current General Fund programs. • Mandatory water utility "round up": When projected income was tallied, initial income was determined not to support a one- year CIP project list. With additional administrative costs to handle the program, it was determined that the cost far outweighed the benefit, and the idea was determined as "not feasible" as a sustainable revenue source. There was also an equity issue, since the amount paid per resident would be different for each person; if rounded to the next dollar, a person with a $40.56 water bill would pay $.44, while someone with a $40.98 water bill would only pay $.02. • Park renewal/replacement fee on water bills: While this idea would have generated a reasonable amount of revenue to sustain the CIP and been a reliable, sustainable revenue source, City Attorney Bob Bauer determined this idea had no legal basis to proceed. Thus the legality of the idea determined it to be "not feasible." This analysis meets Council's request to eliminate options that are not legally feasible. A confidential memo from the City Attorney's office reiterates this point, that legally this is not a feasible option. • Charitable gambling proceeds: State statute allows municipalities to receive a 10% contribution from charitable gambling operations within their community. While this system would generate some funds, the total amount would not be enough annually to sustain more than one or two projects on one year's CIP list. Income would potentially range from $24,000 to $40,000 each year, if gambling remains steady. Decline in legal gambling would decrease the amount.of income. This idea was determined to not generate enough revenue to be considered a sustainable revenue source. • Increase park dedication fees: This idea will, in fact, generate revenue. It has been the primary revenue source for decades, sustaining CIP projects. Each year, fees are adjusted/ increased to reflect market value of land. However, this source of revenue will decrease and eventually cease as land is developed and the City begins its 21 "maintenance and replacement" mode. This source may not be reliable in the near (10- 20 year) future to sustain CIP projects. Charge the Public Works department for utility easements in parks: There are many utility easements located on park property. The thought behind this option was to attach a fee to the land used for utility easements, to be charged to the Public Works department. There was concern, however, about using this as an income source; first, the Parks Department is not charged for utilities to the parks. This would detract from the earnings from this option. These findings were reported to Council at their workshop meeting on March 25, 2003. Council requested that additional information be investigated, such as: • Volunteerism: While volunteerism definitely benefits parks systems and can save some labor costs, it is not a revenue generator. Volunteers typically volunteer for one- time projects for service groups. Volunteers who commit regular service are not allowed to use the heavy equipment such as groomers or mowers due to potential liability problems. A survey was conducted to inquire about volunteerism and adopt-a-park income in other Minnesota communities. 93% of the 39 respondents said that volunteers produced no revenue for their parks system. This idea was determined as "not feasible" as a long-term revenue source. Adopt-A-Park programs: Respondents to the volunteerism and adopt-a-park survey indicated that Adopt-a-Park programs do not generate revenue for the department (see Figure 1), and certainly not enough to sustain CIP parks projects at Eagan's level. Figure 2 shows that 68% of respondents indicate that their Adopt-a-Park program was a "light maintenance only" program where there is no fee charged for participation. This idea was deemed "not sustainable as a revenue source." Figure 1: Adopt-A-Park Considered a Sustainable Revenue Source Figure 2: Adopt-a-Park Duties Financial 5% Financial and maintenance 27% Light maintenance Lottery Grants: Staff investigated the process by which lottery funds are distributed. State lottery funds are distributed to the Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR), who allots it for grant funding. The City of Eagan has received LCMR-allotted funds through the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources in the form of grant funds. According to the LCMR, individual municipalities are not eligible to apply directly for State Lottery funding. • Partnership Opportunities: Eagan Parks and Recreation has historically welcomed sponsorship and partnership opportunities. In recent years, a sponsorship policy has been developed to guide the City on its dealings with external sponsors. The APrC is Other 0% Heavy Maintenance 0% 2s, currently working on a donor recognition policy that will help with those opportunities. While partnerships are always welcome and a valuable part of the Parks system, they tend to be project or amenity specific rather than supportive of general parks operations or CIP lists. As such, they are typically not perceived as a revenue stream to fund CIP projects. COUNCIL CHARGE: SET GOALS FOR FUTURE FUNDING INITIATIVES AND DETERMINE FUNDING SOURCES FOR SPECIFIC GOALS The APrC met in September of 2003 to discuss future steps to supporting CIP funds. They reviewed the annual cost of maintaining the parks system as-is, with no new development and no additional amenities. They determined that to maintain the status quo of the parks system, it seemed reasonable to depreciate current Park Site Fund assets at $245,000 per year. Hypothetically, if no additional funds were added, the Park Site Fund would run out in 12 years just on holding the current park system, replacing depreciated amenities and regular replacements such as playground equipment, tennis courts, etc. Park Site Funds are used for CIP park development projects only, and by statute are not to be used in the general maintenance of a park or its amenities. Of course, there will likely be some income from parks dedication, so the estimated 12 years may be conservative. On the other hand, maintaining the status quo has not been the only function of the Park Site Fund. It is also used for acquisition, park development, Master Planning, new amenities, and the like. The status quo of expenditure actually reduces the 12- year estimate for depletion of existing Park Site Fund. Therefore, as revenue from parks and trails dedication decreases, it becomes urgent that a solid, identifiable source of revenue be identified before Park Site Funds can not support a conservative CIP. The APrC came up with three recommendations for Council to consider. RECOMMENDATIONS After over a year of research, workshops, discussion, and analysis, the Advisory Parks Commission has compiled its findings pertaining to alternative funding streams for City of Eagan parks. • Short-term: Discuss the logistics of a referendum to be used for acquisition and development projects. Also, use the existing park site fund for renewal/replacement, at approximately $245,000 per annum. • Long-term: Consider raising the levy, within the boundaries set by the state legislature. Consider a dedicated fund for renewal, development, and purchase of park amenities. • Continuous: Grants, donorships, and sponsorships will be pursued whenever possible. Grant funds tend to be project-specific and can not be considered a replacement to a continuous funding stream, but they are a very welcome supplement. Date: August 18, 2008 Agenda Item: 11; Photos in Parks City of Eaall MEMO AGENDA ITEM: II; PHOTOS IN PARKS TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION Action Information x Attachments x November 2007 memo PREPARED BY: CHERRYL MESKO, SUPERINTENDENT OF OPERATIONS PAULA NOWARIAK, RECREATION PROGRAM MANAGER ITEM OVERVIEW: Provide follow-up of Recreation Subcommittee review of photos in parks. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: In November 2007 the Recreation Sub-committee reviewed and discussed the issue of commercial and non-commercial photography in parks; Central Park and Holz Farm Park, in particular. The initial review addressed instances when commercial or non-commercial photographers' use of these two parks in particular, conflicted with programmed or reserved events. A copy of the memo distributed to the sub-committee is enclosed for reference. DISCUSSION/EVALUATION: The Recreation Sub-committee reviewed the information in great detail and generally agreed that they did not want to recommend a fee based permit at this time. The consensus of the sub- committee was to: ¦ Educate guests about how they can plan their photo sessions so as not to conflict with scheduled rentals or events. ¦ Develop a simple photo reservation system that will allow guests to reserve a time in a park to take photos. ¦ Charge no fee for the reservation but it would provide staff with a way to know in advance when photo sessions are occurring in parks or to steer reservations away from sites when there is a reserved event or program. ¦ Have the reservation form easily available; on-line or through front line staff. 21, City of Eap Mn To: Advisory Parks Commission Recreation Sub-Committee From: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations Paula Nowariak, Recreation Program Manager Date: November 9, 2007 Subject: Photography in Parks - Central Park and Holz Farm Park ISSUE The Eagan Community Center, Central Park and Holz Farm Park have become very popular spots for both commercial and non-commercial photography. The beautiful surroundings are a natural place for prom-goers, wedding parties and other milestone moments to be captured. Unfortunately there are times when unexpected crowds interfere with private rentals or events in progress. As a public park there is the perception that the space should always be available and free of charge. To preserve the integrity of events that have reserved portions of these spaces it may be time to talk about how the City of Eagan can continue to provide this access to photographers while carefully maintaining the integrity of reserved events. GOAL Review background information and determine if there is a need to develop a policy, permit and/or fee for commercial and non-commercial photography in Eagan parks; Central Park and Holz Farm Park in particular. Policy To make designated areas within the park system available to organized groups for commercial and non-commercial filming/photography events. Policy/Permit/Fee Parameters For Discussion 1. Professional photography ($ _fee per'/2 hour/hour session) This would include any photo shoot used in promotion, advertisement or marketing by an organization; i.e. catalog pictures, television commercials or brochure photographs. • Individuals will be permitted in designated areas only. • Reserved areas will be privately held for the photo sessions. • Renters found using other areas for photos will be asked to leave. • Individuals found damaging landscaping, property or using areas that might create an unsafe situation (climbing on walls, roofs, trees, etc.) will be asked to leave • All photo sessions must use designated access points assigned at the time of reservation to avoid interrupting events in progress. Z?. 2. Professional Photographer Permit ($ yearly fee) • Can be obtained for taking non-commercial pictures at ECC, Central Park and Holz Farm. • Photographers with permit would not pay the reservation fee for each session but would still be required to make an advance reservation and follow non-commercial policies. • Requires proof of insurance 3. Non-commercial photography ($ _ fee per 1/2/hour session) This would include events like weddings, graduation and family photos taken by an amateur. • Individuals will be permitted in designated areas only. • Renters found using other areas for photos will be asked to leave. • Individuals found damaging landscaping, property or using areas that might create an unsafe situation (climbing on walls, roofs, trees, etc.) will be asked to leave • All photo sessions must use designated access points assigned at the time of reservation to avoid interrupting events in progress. 4. Prom/Dance photos ($_ per couple fee) • Advance reservations required • Larger groups must make reservation times together and number of individuals in any one area may be restricted. • Participants permitted in designated areas only. • Reserved areas will be privately held for the photo sessions. • Renters found using other areas for photos will be asked to leave. • Individuals found damaging landscaping, property or using areas that might create an unsafe situation (climbing on walls, roofs, trees, etc.) will be asked to leave • All photo sessions must use designated access points assigned at the time of reservation to avoid interrupting events in progress. EDUCATION • Notify high school prom/dance committees annually and provide them with information to share. • Use direct mail to reach local photographers with policy information • Publish information in Discover • Signage around the building(s) and grounds • Provide front line staff with "words" to explain policies to callers • Streamline reservation process that is simple and could be available online SIGNAGE Photographs may be taken with an advanced reservation. Please check in at the Guest Services desk or Please call 651-675-5500 or go to www.cityofea agn.ccom to make a reservation Restrictions or fees may apply QUESTIONS • Are there other park locations that should be included or should the list be inclusive? • What are the barriers to this working? • What are the ramifications if nothing is done? • Should the first year be a trial to see how it works? • What concerns do you have? NEXT STEP: • Present information and make a recommendation to the APrC. • Include fees (if any) into the 2008 Fee Schedule for recommendation to the City Council 30. SAMPLE Name: 9 Reservation for Photos in Ci f E P k Address: 0 agan ar ty o s City of Ea as Phone: (h) (w) Changes to Reservation Reservation Location: Date of Reservation: Time of Reservation: Special Requests: PLEASE BRING THIS RESERVATION FORM WITH YOU Signature: Date: Name: Reservation for Photos in Cit f E P k Address: 0 y o agan ar s City of Eapn Phone: (h) (w) > Changes to Reservation °-' Reservation Location: Date of Reservation: Time of Reservation: Special Requests: PLEASE BRING THIS RESERVATION FORM WITH YOU Signature: Date: City of Eaall MEMO Date: August 18, 2008 Agenda Item: III; Public Art-Community Tile Mosaic Action Information x Attachments x Proposal and Drawings Public Art Policy AGENDA ITEM: III; PUBLIC ART - COMMUNITY TILE MOSAIC TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION PREPARED BY: JULI SEYDELL JOHNSON, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION ITEM OVERVIEW: Provide background on proposal for public art and solicit feedback from APrC. ,... a,:?.i?: .., 7;. .:,:,-.ems.'=: ?+!M+.uC.<. -. ?..._:. •.._ : ,+?iPr?ri...:._ :?k5ra.,.lvan-?tir.3.iYS?:9mC??=.F::,?tt,?: rr::?:?i.,?'a%s. .:...r, :.. ? :. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: In 2006 the APrC recommended and the City Council adopted a policy pertaining to public art and memorial installations in City of Eagan Parks. A copy of that policy is attached as background for members who may not have been part of that initial review. The Eagan Art House staff has coordinated a project that involves the whole community in creating a tile mosaic that could be displayed at Central Park but would be mobile so that it could be moved to other locations. This project is part of a grant received from the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council and is designed to join together members in the community to share in the creation of an intergenerational piece of artwork. A copy of the proposal and drawings are included for Commission review. DISCUSSION/EVALUATION: Based on the intention of the Public Art policy, all requests to place public art need to first be addressed and reviewed by the APrC before moving through the formal process. While this request is to place art in Central Park, the actual artwork is part of a program inspired by Eagan Art House staff with benefit of grant dollars to bring it to fruition. The actual art is moveable and not planned to be a permanent fixture within any particular park. After review the APrC may conclude that this is an informational item that does not require the formalized review outlined in the Public Art policy. If that is not the case, this item could be moved to a future APrC meeting. S/, Proposal to APrC for Public Art August 18, 2008 Community Tile Mosaic Coordinated by Eagan Art House 1. Drawing of mosaic design. Two draft designs are attached for your review. 2. Appraised value of the structure: Estimated $700.00 3. The project will be comprised of approximately 110 ceramic tiles, 4 3/8" x 4 3/8". The tiles will be glazed and adhered to a wooden frame with heavy duty adhesive. The entire mosaic will then be sealed. Eagan city maintenance will build a frame and mounting structure for installation. As appropriate, some seasonal naturalistic plantings could be added underneath the structure to enhance the appearance and blend it with the surroundings. 4. The dimensions of the mosaic will be approximately 5 ft. wide by 3 ft. high before installation. The project will be installed about 2 feet off the ground giving the total dimensions after installation approximately 5 ft tall and 5 ft wide. 5. The mosaic will be comprised of ceramic tiles, adhesive, grout and sealer framed in a wooden frame and attached to sign posts for installation. The Community Tile Mosaic, part of a grant received from the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council, is an intergenerational project designed to join together members in the community to share in the creation of a piece of artwork. As the planning of this project proceeded over this summer, we discussed displaying the project in a public park for greater visibility and connection to the community. The mosaic will be created at a workshop at the Lone Oak Room on September 11th. Community members are invited to attend the workshop to create individual tiles for the mosaic. Each individual tile will be part of the larger design of the mosaic. Community members can lend their own creativity to their tile, while coordinating with the colors of the overall design. From a distance, the overall design will be quite evident. As viewers move closer to the work, they will be able to see the individual creativity on each single tile. The workshop will be taught by an Eagan Art House instructor. The mosaic will then be put together and completed by Eagan Art House staff and volunteers. The targeted location for this artwork is in Central Park near the trail around the new savannah forest project. This part of the park was recently highlighted during the Arbor Day celebration and has a new bench in the area. The tile mosaic would highlight this already beautiful area. The design of this project will be natural in style to blend, yet enhance this park area. Plantings around the structure will add natural beauty as well as protect it from mowers. The artwork will include signage that briefly describes the community cooperation of this project. 22. 6. The project and proposed site were chosen because of the inherent natural beauty of the location and the public access to the site. The tile mosaic, produced by individual community members, echoes the mission and purpose of the Parks & Recreation department to bring people together. The goal of the creation of this piece of artwork is to leave a legacy to the community for future enjoyment and inspiration. 7. The installation of this piece will be designed so that it can be removed during the winter months and displayed indoors. This alternative is to protect the mosaic from freezing water and harsh winter elements. The artwork will be returned to its place in the spring of each year. Eagan Art House and Maintenance staff will coordinate the transporting of the artwork. Parks & Recreation staff will coordinate indoor placement of the artwork. The piece can potentially be on display in various city building locations from year to year. The probable lifespan of this piece of artwork is 20-25 years with routine maintenance. Most adhesives will last 20 - 30 years. The wood that the mosaic is mounted on will need to be monitored for warping. Maintenance would include sealing the tiles and wood as needed, replacement of broken tile and repair of grout. Art House staff and maintenance staff will annually assess any repairs that need to be done. Since the mosaic will be moved indoors for the harsh winter months, the lifespan of the piece will likely be longer than 20 - 25 years. 8. This artwork will be a completely unique piece due to the individual creation of each tile. This does not duplicate other artwork in the city. 33, G y j t 1 ?• / 1 ' ? p ' ? t i I \`\ C4, { 1 ; Policies and Procedures b. Eagan Parks and Recreation will promote the program through the D' er Brochure and the City's website. Flyers may also be distributed ugh other Eagan Parks and Recreation programs. Independent Con1r rs may also roduce/distribute their own publicity for these progr c. 25% o collected fees will be retained by ity up to a maximum of $25 per registra ' . The remaining registra ' fees will be paid to the independent con for at conclusio each class/season. d. The independent contracto esponsiblefor facility rental fees in addition to the 25% of revenue re ' ed by a Parks and Recreation. With advance agreement, this f ay also be deduct ectly from the contractor's 75% of program re ' ation fees. e. R requested before the registration deadline; approved by the Refunds after the program,begins will only-be issued- the approval of the independent contractor. 7.3 Public Art and Memorial Installations in City of Eagan Parks 7.3.1 Statement of Purpose The purpose of this policy is to encourage the, display of public art in the City of Eagan and to provide a mechanism for the inclusion of public art and memorial structures throughout the city's parks and open spaces. Public art can play a vital role in transforming the community into a destination, a distinct place within the metropolitan area. Public art can also acknowledge, and celebrate the City's. history through commemorative art, memorials, and interpretive projects. While public art and memorials may enrich a park experience for park users, public open space is also a very precious commodity. New structures should be carefully reviewed to balance these two public benefits. 7.3.2 Process for Selection Artwork and memorial structures may be acquired through donation, open competition, invitational competition or direct selection. The process for evaluating proposals is as follows: a. Proposals for placement of artwork or memorial structures must be made in writing to the Director of Parks- and Recreation. b. Public comment period announced at APrC meeting. C., Evaluation by the APrC with a recommendation based upon the public benefit of the action made to the City Council. d. Action by the City Council. April, 2006 City of Eagan Page 54 Parks and Recreation Policies and Procedures 7.3.3 Conflicts of Interest Any member of the APrC with a connection or interest in one of the artists or pieces of art must disclose this conflict of interest. 7.3.4 Public Review and'Comment Period Each proposal will be announced to the public at an APrC regular meeting and then made available for public review and comment at Eagan City Hall for a minimum of 30 days before action is taken by the APrC. 7.3.5 Required Proposal Information The written proposal must include: a. A photo or drawing of the structure. b. Appraised value of the structure. c. Description of materials used to create structure including materials needed to display/ secure the structure in the park. d. Dimensions of structure including appropriate base materials needed at the park site. e. Description, including materials, dimensions, wording and location, of interpretive signage for the structure: f. Statement regarding relationship to proposed site including aesthetic, cultural, or historic ties. g. Statement of probable lifespan of structure and annual maintenance needed to maintain structure integrity. h. Statement as to whether the work is unique or duplicates other work by the same artist i. Statement regarding the significance of the person or event to be memorialized in relationship to the community and to the proposed site. (Memorial proposals only) 7.3.6 Public Art and Memorial Guidelines All art and memorial structures must comply with applicable statues such as the Uniform Municipal Contracting Law, environmental laws, and disability/ accessibility laws. In addition, all art and memorial structures must meet the following guidelines before being considered for placement in a City-owned park or open space: a. Absolute ownership and control of the art or memorial structure must pass to the City, including all drawings, proposals, sketches, and other conceptualizations of the art or memorial. All intellectual property rights, April, 2006 City of Eagan Page 55 Parks and Recreation Policies and Procedures including patents, copyrights and moral rights must be assigned to the City. The applicant artist or donor shall waive all intellectual property rights, including moral rights, to the art or memorial structure. b. Donations will not be accepted where a condition of donations requires permanent exhibition. c. In the judgment of the majority of the APrC and the City Council, the structure must be appropriate for display to the general public. d. Cost of on-going maintenance and repair anticipated throughout the lifespan of the structure must fall within normal park maintenance budget allocations. e. Donations that require the City to pay installation, framing, restoration, or repair are not encouraged. f. Artist or provider may request a specific site. However, each placement will be evaluated based upon suitability of the structure for the site. The APrC will make a recommendation to the Council concerning an appropriate site for each structure. g. If proposal accepted by the City is a concept or design then the final product must match the approved concept or design. h. The person to be memorialized shall have been,deceased for a minimum of five years. (Memorials only.) 7.3.7 Criteria for Review The APrC will make a recommendation based upon the following criteria: a. The proposed structure should be compared with the artists' best work and the best works in the City collection. The acquisition should strengthen, rather than dilute the City's collection., b. If the structure is to be erected outdoors, the physical condition of the structure should be considered in terms of durability in an outdoor setting. Any requirements for immediate or future conservation should be noted. c. The structure must add interest and meaning to the environment in which it is placed. It must be compatible in scale, material, form and content with its surrounding and form an overall relationship with the site. Structure must conform to any existing Master Plan for the site. d. The structure must have social, cultural, historical and physical context to the site, both existing and planned. e. The City's overall collection shall strive for diversity in style, scale, media, and artists. There shall be encouragement of exploratory types of work as well as established art forms. April, 2006 City of Eagan Page 56 Parks and Recreation Policies and Procedures f. In addition to the criteria for a piece of art, memorials will be judged on the significance of the person or event being memorialized in relation to local social, cultural or historical context and must represent broad community values. g. Structures whose messages are exclusively religious in nature will not be accepted. h. Structures whose messages are exclusively political in nature willonly be considered if the political message is of a historical context 7.3.8 Removal of Public Art and Memorials The City- shall remove and dispose of works of art and memorials in its collection when it finds such action to be in the public interest based upon the following: a. As a means of improving the quality of the City's collection J. The structure has no relevance to the collection or serves no exhibition function. ii. The structure has a duplicate in the collection. iii. The structure no longer meets the current standards for public art and memorials. b. Due to concerns for public safety when a structure becomes a hazard or a public liability: c. The structure is in a seriously deteriorated condition. d. Removal should not be based on current fashion or taste. Attention should be paid to maintaining a collection which forms a continuum of the City's visual art history. Recommendations for removal shall be made to the APrC who will then make a recommendation based upon the public benefit of the action to the City Council for final approval. Each request for removal will be announced to the public at an APrC regular meeting and then made available for public review and comment at Eagan City Hall for a minimum of 30 days before action is taken by the APrC. Once approval for removal is granted, the structure shall be disposed of in accordance with Minnesota Statues Chapter 471. April, 2006 City of Eagan Page 57 Parks and Recreation Date: August 18, 2008 Agenda Item: Intern Report °' City of EaRd MEMO AGENDA ITEM: INTERN REPORT TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION Action x Information Attachments PREPARED BY: PARKS AND RECREATION INTERN TANYA BEEKMAN ITEM OVERVIEW: A study of economic impacts in the City of Eagan from wedding receptions and softball tournaments. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: My name is Tanya Beekman; I am completing my internship with the City of Eagan Parks and Recreation Department. Upon completion of my internship I will have graduated from the University of Wisconsin - La Crosse, with a Bachelor's degree in Sport Management. Over the summer I have had the opportunity to partake in many aspects of the Parks and Recreation Department and have gained valuable knowledge that will help me excel in my career path. Along with my internship I have conducted a research project that shows the economic impact weddings and athletic tournaments have on the Eagan community. The purpose of this report is to inform the Commission about the importance of having large events held throughout our community and the benefits they bring to everyone. Weddings held at the Eagan Community Center: One of the latest additions to the City of Eagan was the Eagan Community Center. The Community Center is equipped with 3 banquet halls that hold up to 100 people per room or when they are combined can accommodate 350 people seated at tables. The Community Center landscaping offers a breathtaking backdrop for an outdoor ceremony or wedding party pictures. Residents from Eagan and surrounding areas have taken advantage of this beautiful facility for their private parities. All information regarding the Eagan Community Center is from 2007 rentals. The average wedding costs just over $23, 000 dollars according to The Knot Magazine. Usually half of the wedding costs are allocated to the reception, which includes both catering and rental fees. Rentals: The Eagan Community Center saw an average of 8-12 community rentals a week, with a total of 900 reservations throughout the year. • A Friday basic room rental maintained a total profit of $1689, which is expected to increase to $1867 in 2008. iii • A Saturday basic room rental had total profits of $1989, with a projected increase of revenue of $2217 in 2008. • When totaled for the year estimated profits before customary costs come to about $212,000. The rental coordinator at the Eagan Community Center noted that outdoor ceremony rentals seem to be increasing through the beginning part of 2008. The vice president of Consultants' Association stated that outdoor weddings usually run 10% more expensive than indoor weddings. This is yet another revenue stream that the Eagan Community Center has been able to capitalize on, as well as promote the beauty of Eagan to all who attend the event. Catering Fees: The Eagan Community Center also receives between 10 and 15% of catering fees that groups use when renting the facility. Actual revenues from these catering costs vary due to the size of each reservation, but according to the National Association of Wedding Ministers, 175 people attend the average wedding. Community Benefits: Beyond revenues generated at the Eagan Community Center weddings also benefit the entire Eagan Community. Photographers, florists, music, gifts and wedding attire account for 38% of wedding costs. Local businesses are able to take advantage of these revenue streams, which helps their business expand and meet sales goals. Nationally $19 billion is spent on buying gifts through wedding registries. Hotels also benefit from having events held at the Community Center because of the additional number of out of town guests that will need to use their venues. • The Eagan Convention and Visitors Bureau alone has helped book hotel rooms for 28 wedding parties in 2008. There are also weddings throughout the year that book hotel rooms without the assistance of the Convention and Visitors Bureau. • The Convention and Visitors Bureau stated that by having wedding parties stay in Eagan they spend their dollars locally, not only on hotel rooms but also at restaurants, gas stations and other amenities throughout the community. • Statistics show the average spent per room night is $176. Down and Dirty Fastpitch Softball Tournament: Eagan Fastpitch Softball hosts the annual Dad's Day, Down and Dirty Tournament in June at Lexington Diffley Athletic Fields as well as Northview Park. The tournament has become so well known and efficiently run that it has helped bring a National Fastpitch Softball Tournament to Eagan at the end of July. These additional three days are another opportunity for out of town guests to use local amenities and spend their dollars in Eagan. Community Benefits: The tournament is held with no less than 92 teams committed to play at five different age levels by mid-March. Approximately 13% of these teams come from out of town, meaning they would have to stay at a hotel for at least one night. Since the tournament hosts out of town teams, local hotels are able to offer their services to these guests. For the 2008 Down and Dirty Tournament at least five Eagan hotels had teams from the tournament using their facilities. • As stated before each room night equates to an average of $176 of spending throughout the community, whether it be restaurants, gas stations or other local venues. • Additional members that accompany the athlete to the tournament spend a $100 a day on expenditures according to the National Recreation and Park Association. Typically there are 40 people that accompany a team to tournaments, this is a potential of $4000 in additional revenues each day. Over a series of 30 case studies the National Recreation and Park Association found that sports tournaments frequently generate more than $100,000 in revenues from out-of-town guests per day. General fund resources are used to maintain facilities that are appropriate for both in-house programs and special tournaments. These events help attract a large number of non-resident visitors who spend their money in the local community, both at the facilities they visit and in the surrounding community. Parks and Recreation Magazine stated that this outside money creates income and jobs for residents. "The community provides the initial funds, and receives a return on their investment in the form of new jobs and more household income."(Crompton, Parks and Recreation) A tournament such as the Down and Dirty Tournament creates an average of eight jobs within the city and a potential increase in sales of $352,000 during the 3 days the tournament is in town. The additional revenue comes from the out-of-town visitors that have to spend their money throughout the city. The increase in sales allows the businesses in the area to add more positions due to the increase in demand of for their services. As teams check in for the Down and Dirty Tournament as well as the National Tournament they receive gift bags for all of their athletes. These bags include a Mall of America coupon book, Eagan guide, Eagan map, coupons from Eagan restaurants as well as a variety of Eagan promotional pieces. All of these items help encourage local spending, and also provides visitors with a variety of coupons to come back and visit Eagan again. • Local business managers noted that an increase in business was seen over the days of the Down and Dirty Tournament, especially the first day when more teams were still participating in the tournament. • The majority of businesses had to increase the number of people staffed the weekend of the tournament to help cover the additional business. • Sales figures for business usually help predict sales goals for the following year. Without the tournament in town, sales goals as well as actual sales would have to be lowered. Local Player Benefits: The director of the Down and Dirty Tournament stated that usually 2-3 additional people accompany an athlete to the tournament. This benefits the community not only with dollars spent that weekend, but also those additional people who are able to see what Eagan has to offer, which helps bring them back to visit again. The Eagan Parks and Recreation Department receives $2,630 in field rental fees for the weekend, which possibly would not be booked that weekend if not for the tournament. The team registration fees paid to the softball association from the Down and Dirty Tournament allows lower registration fees to all girls who choose to participate in Eagan Fastpitch Softball. The revenues are also used to purchase up to date equipment each season. Beyond reduced registration fees and new equipment, revenues provide player development opportunities throughout the year, including sessions at the Rosemount Dome. ,1401 Opinion: I believe that the having these tournaments and large venues within the community is well-worth the impact they have on local users. Although some of the in-house summer programs have to be moved for one or two days while the tournament is in town the additional revenue that was created from having the tournament is worth the small shift in schedules. The tournaments help create stronger businesses within the community, which open a wide range of opportunities for Eagan residents. New jobs are created as well as a larger tax base that helps keep taxes at a lower rate for all residents, due to the additional revenues local businesses see with the tournaments. The additional exposure that Eagan receives when non-residents come into town for these tournaments is beneficial because it shows what Eagan has to offer and encourages them to come and visit another weekend. I feel that because there are not large tournaments every weekend we are not taking away time for residents to use the fields, there are two select weekends that softball uses these fields and the benefits to everyone is well worth having those fields booked those weekends. Since wedding receptions are commonly held during the evening there is little disturbance to the rest of the Community Center members. The Community Center was designed in a way that allows for little interaction between fitness members and wedding guests. Beyond just the revenues that the Community Center receives from wedding receptions businesses throughout the community also receive additional business from brides and grooms looking to make their day as special as possible. From florists to photographers to musicians having a beautiful facility like the Community Center helps keep their business booming. Overall I believe that having tournaments and wedding receptions at facilities within the City of Eagan is an integral part of the local economy and helps boost the local community spirit. Conclusion: The City of Eagan is fortunate to have top-notch facilities that are heavily used among members of not only the Eagan Community but surrounding communities. The key to successfully hosting weddings and tournaments in Eagan is the intuitive designs of the facilities that allow for various simultaneous uses. The increase in revenues has a tremendous impact on the local community, but above and beyond that it allows the community to be involved in a variety of facets throughout the city and offers residents a chance to meet their neighbors. 211. Page 1 of 1 Cherryl Mesko From: Juli Johnson Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:50 PM To: Cherryl Mesko Subject: FW: Day Camp Sacajawea Please include in APrC packet. Thanks, Juli Juli Seydell Johnson Director of Parks and Recreation City of Eagan, Minnesota Phone: 651-675-5500 From: Paula Nowariak Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:06 PM To: earecasst Cc: Juli Johnson Subject: FW: Day Camp Sacajawea Paula Nowariak, Recreation Program Manager Eagan Parks & Recreation 13830 Pilot Knob Road I Eagan, MN 55122 651.675.5512 1 www.cityofeagan.com From: Sue Bradley [mailto:susanbradley@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:07 AM To: Paula Nowariak Subject: Day Camp Sacajawea Hello, My daughter attended the day camp at Sacajawea last week. We misplaced our evaluation form, but she wanted you to know she "LOVES" day camp. Of all the Park and Rec programs she has attended (she is now 11), it is her perennial favorite. The activities were great fun, and the staff is "amazing." The overnight is always a highlight. For my part, I love to see the kids be able to enjoy such a beautiful camp right in our own community. The camp is a good value, too. Sue Bradley 8/12/2008 3F, Page 1 of 1 Cherryl Mesko From: Juli Johnson Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 8:06 AM To: Cherryl Mesko Subject: FW: T-Ball Cherryl, Please include in August APrC Packet. Thanks, Juli Juli Seydell Johnson Director of Parks and Recreation City of Eagan, Minnesota Phone: 651-675-5500 From: Holly Champlin Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 2:36 PM To: Juli Johnson; Paula Nowariak Subject: FW: T-Ball Holly Champlin I Recreation Supervisor I City of Eagan r] qn City of Eagan 13830 Pilot Knob Road I Eagan, MN 55122 1651-675-5520 1651-675-5012 (Fax) I IlQhaMpriq@cityofeagan.com City of E&E, l 11 THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. From: Angela DeWitt [mailto:angeladewitt@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 1:04 PM To: Holly Champlin Subject: T-Ball Holly- I just wanted to let you know how impressed we were with the T-Ball program for 5 yr-olds. The four coaches were excellent with the kids, and my son loved going to the practices each week. We were also really impressed with the good communication we received from your office regarding the change of location for one of the practices as well as the rescheduling of the rained-out practice. We'll definitely be signing up again! Thank you- Angela DeWitt 8/6/2008 3q, AUGUST 2008 DEPARTMENT HAPPENINGS • STRENGTHEN COMMUNITY IMAGE AND SENSE OF PLACE • Approximately 4,000 people attended the July 30th Eagan Market Fest event with 40 classic cars were on display and and The Rockin Hollywoods played to a full crowd from 5:30 - 8 pm. A community partnership with Dakota County & DARTS "Living Longer & Stronger in Dakota County" initiative kicked off at the event. The 2008 Market Fest event has grown considerably over 2007. In 2007, there were 10-12 regular vendors and have grown to 40 vendors in 2008; still adding unique specialty food items. Attendance has grown from 300 - 400 a night in 2007 to approx. 1,500 on an average night up to the 4,000 on July 30th • The migration of seasonal employees back to school has begun. Some boulevards and parks may get a little shaggy around the edges. • Eagan Art House open house is Sunday, August 24 from 1-4. The event features a public outdoor Raku firing, hands on art activities, pottery sale and ice cream for sale from Ring Mountain Creamery. • Harvest of Art Community Art Exhibit will run from August 24 through October 10. As of 8/13, 26 adults and 5 youth are registered, with up to 62 pieces of artwork that will be displayed. The exhibit opens will all artwork at the Art House at the open house. Then, the artwork will be divided and transported to Ring Mountain Creamery and Easter Lutheran Church for the rest of the exhibit. • The Eagan Seniors and the Eagan Teens partnered to host the 4th of July bingo at the Fun Fest. • The Eagan Seniors made a beautiful quilt that they donated to the Eagan Teen Advisory Board to raise funds for new equipment (possibly a ping pong table) in the Oasis Teen Center. • The puppet wagon is rolling into storage after August 15. Attendance records are still being tallied, however in the first 7 weeks, over 3,000 people came out to see the shows and participate in the after show crafts. • SUPPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • On August 23rd, the ECC will be home to a record four weddings in one day. • The month of September is typically the busiest month for the ECC. This year there is at least one rental in the banquet hall for all but one day in September, with most days having multiple rentals. • The Civic Arena is host tolO hockey and figure skating camps this summer, with participants coming from surrounding communities. • The Civic Arena was host to 2 high school tournaments in July - bringing in teams from as far away as Cloquet and Duluth. • STRENGTHEN SAFETY AND SECURITY • There has been a large amount of graffiti in parks, PD has followed up, hopefully it will stop once school starts. • Preschool Safety camp was held August 11-14. Eagan Fire Fighters, Police Officers, and the Swim School all worked with staff to put on a camp for children ages 3-7 to learn about being safe, 31 children participated. Tul PROMOTE HEALTH AND WELLNESS • 80 teams are registered for fall softball which begins the week of August 13th • Registration for fall basketball, touch football and volleyball began August 4th for returning teams and August 11th for new teams. • Member Appreciation Night is planned for ECC Fitness Members on Wednesday, August 20th from 5-7pm which will include an outdoor BBQ picnic. • The ECC will be offering a zero enrollment fitness promotion the week of September 22-28 as a way to celebrate their 5 year anniversary. • Approximately 1,400 people have participated in River Walking, Cascade Bay's most popular morning activity! During river walking, the current in the lazy river is used as resistance as people walk against it for exercise. • The new health and wellness class in the Lone Oak Room for 55 plus, Strength/Balance/Yoga, had 22 people enrolled for the first session and 16 for the second session. • Nordic Walking is the newest program for 55 plus. It meets on Wednesdays at 11:30 in the Lone Oak Room. • FOSTER HUMAN DEVELOPMENT • A first time, one day Adapted Fishing class took place on July 21st as a partnership between the city's water quality department staff and recreation's adapted recreation staff. • Seven 13-15 yrs olds completed the first Leaders in Training program held this summer. • Fall Preschool Registrations are currently being accepted, and classes begin on September 8. • INCREASE CULTURAL UNITY • Songs of Hope a youth choir from around the world performed on July 23th at the Eagan Market Fest as part of celebration of cultures at Market Fest. More than 150 kids created art project flags from around the world at the Eagan Art House tent at Market Fest. • PROTECT ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES • August 13 was Environmental & Recycling Night at Market Fest. City of Eagan Departments of Water Quality, Forestry and Dakota Recycling took part with interactive displays and information at the event. • The County STS crew has been working in the parks removing invasive plants from around ponds and also mulching trees and landscape beds FACILITATE COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS • Eagan Business Night at Market Fest was held on July 16th in which 20 Eagan business and community organizations showcased their products and services at a booth during the Market Fest event. • The Minnesota Northstars Quad Rugby team will hold a two day tournament at the ECC on September 20-21. • The Eagan High School boys and girls swim team will host a fundraiser at Cascade Bay, August 14th from 8:45-10:45 pm. • Apple Valley parks and recreation took 20 children on a field trip to the Eagan Art House on August 1 and 15th. • Utilizing CDBG funding, 5 recreation demonstrations programs were conducted at O'Leary senior housing. This is part of the community outreach program for 55 plus. Over 60 residents from O'Leary and Lakeside Point attended the demonstrations. Plans are now underway to provide 4 recreation classes at O'Leary that will be open for all CDA residents. 41, • PROVIDE RECREATION EXPERIENCES • There were 145 participants registered for the summer ice skating school that ran July 7-August 21 compared to 80 participants in 2007. • Phase II work at Patrick Eagan Park has begun. Improvements include a new parking lot, Art House drop-off drive, rain gardens, trails from Lexington Avenue, a picnic shelter, signage, native prairie restoration and an over look deck. As part of the project the existing access drive to the Art House and PEP will be permanently closed fairly soon. Access will then move to the shared Church entrance. Most of the contractual work (hard surfaces) will be completed by September 1, the other amenities will be installed over the fall. There may be some temporary inconveniences but the Art House will remain open during the project. • The shared irrigation project on the DHMS / NV Elem fields is underway. Completion is expected by August 28. ISD 196 / EAA and the City are sharing the cost, 196 is running the project. • The installation of replacement playgrounds at Holz Farm and Carlson Lake parks is complete. Work has now shifted to replacing the equipment at Ohmann Park. • The new access and seating area for the Carlson Lake fishing pier is nearly complete. The fishing dock will be installed later this fall or early spring, pending delivery. The neighbors are very excited about it. • The new buildings at Thresher Fields are performing as expected. Staff is in the process of installing an observation deck overlooking the lake. Landscaping will take place in the fall. • Cascade Bay is offering an After 5 pm promotion, when the admission rates have been reduced to $5/guests over 42" tall, and $3/guests under 42" tall. It has been very popular. So far nearly 1,500 guests have visited during the promotion. • A "Preschool Preview" will be held on Wednesday, September 3 the ECC from 9:30am- 11:30am. The event is free and parents with their preschool aged children may attend and see what is happening this fall for preschool children. 42.