HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-4-4_PR Comm Packet
Roseville Parks and Recreation
Commission Meeting
April 4, 2017
6:30 P.M
.
Roseville City Hall
2660 Civic Center Drive
AGENDA
1.Introductions
2.Public Comment Invited
3.Approval of Minutes of March7, 2017
4.Introduction and Oath of Office for New Commissioners
5.Cedarholm Golf Course Clubhouse Replacement Update
6.Deer ReductionReport Overview
7.Pollinator Friendly City Resolution Discussion
8.Staff Report
a.Tamarack Park Playground Process
b.A Summary of Current Topics Provided
9.Other
10.Adjournment
Roseville Parks and Recreation
“Building Community through People, Parks and Programs”
www.cityofroseville.com
Be a part of the picture… get involved with your City…Volunteer.
or 651-792-7028.
For more information, contact Kelly at kelly.obrien@cityofroseville.com
or check our website at www.cityofroseville.com
Volunteering, a Great Way to Get Involved!
To:Parks and Recreation Commission
From:Lonnie Brokke
Date:March 24, 2017
Re:Notes for Commission Meeting onApril 4, 2017
Introductions
Public Comment Invited
Approval of Minutes of theMarch 7,2017Meeting
Enclosed isacopy of theminutesofMarch 7, 2017.Please be prepared to
approve/amend.
RequestedCommissionAction:Approve/amendmeetingminutesofMarch 7, 2017.
Introduction and Oath of Office for New Commissioner
Darrell Baggenstoss and Greg Hoag were appointed to theParks and Recreation
Commission by the CityCouncilon Monday,March 13, 2017. ChairGelbachwill officially
swear them in.We welcome them tothe Commissionand thank themfor their interest in
Roseville Parksand Recreation.
Requested CommissionAction:
Welcome toCommissioners Baggenstoss and Hoag
andintroduction of all Commissioners.
Cedarholm Golf Course Clubhouse Replacement Update
Astatusreportwas provided to youat yourMarch meeting highlighting guidance needed
bythe City Councilincluding project scope,budget,funding sources and consideration of
the Historical Society as part of this project.
At theMondayMarch 20, 2017City CouncilWork Session, staff presenteda detailed
updateto seektheir guidancesee attached Request forCouncil Action (RCA).Specific
directionprovidedby the City Councilwas to:1)pursue the largerbuilding, whichthen
drives the budget,2)funding sources were discussedbut notfinalized and 3)tono longer
consider the Historical Society as part of thisproject but rather that it would bea betterfit in
the City Hall Campus area.
The Council wasalsovery interested in getting real costsforaproject rather than
Architectsor Engineers estimates.This can be donethroughthedevelopment ofplans and
specifications foraprojectand advertising for proposalsin order to get adefinite cost of
what a contractor would charge to build the building. This willfollow theconceptdesign
workandbe the next step in the process. Asa result, staff has requesteda proposal from
HCM Architects to prepareplans and specificationsto ready for proposals.This would go
backto the City Councilfor considerationand approval.
The current andnearfinal stagein thedesign processisto finalizebuilding images andsite
orientation.Staff will share with you the latest informationon thosetopics at the meeting
and seek your input.
This topic isa regularagenda item eachmonth inorder to keep theCommission updated,
allow for continued community input,and togatheradvice.
Requested Commission Action:Review, update, providefeedback.
Deer Reduction Report Review
As you areaware, thedeer reduction programfor this year is complete. In your packet isa
summary reportfrom the United States Department ofAgriculture (USDA). Staff will be
prepared to provide you abrief overviewandcontinue to gather your thoughts.
Requested Commission Action:
Discuss andprovideinput
Pollinator Friendly City Resolution Discussion
7.
Commission Chair Gelbach has been interestedin and has done research on the topic of
pollinator friendly communities. Included in your packet is a draft Roseville Pollinator
Resolution that Gelbach will plan to present to you and gather your feedback.Eventually,
Gelbach would like to have something to present to the City Council for their action.
Requested Commission Action:
Discuss and provide input
Staff Report
8.
a.
Tamarack Park Playground Process
b.
Asummary of current topics will be provided.
Other
9.
Adjournment
10.
ROSEVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
1
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES FOR
2
March7, 20176:30pm
3
4
PRESENT:
5Bole, Diedrick, Gelbach,O’Brien, Stoner, Warzecha
ABSENT:
6Heikkila,Newby
STAFF:
7Anderson, Brokke,Christensen, McDonagh
8
INTRODUCTIONS
91.
10
ROLL CALL/PUBLICCOMMENT
112.
12No public in attendance.
13
APPROVAL OF MINUTES –February7,2017MEETING
143.
15Commissioner Diedrick movedto approve the February 7, 2017 meeting minutes. Commissioner O’Brien
16seconds. Motion passedunanimously.
17
CEDARHOLM GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE REPLACEMENT REVIEW
184.
19Hagen, Christensen &McIlwain (HCM)were planning to be present for tonight’sMarch 7, 2017
20Commission Meeting. However, it was determined that the meetingwould be a review of the current
21designs/concepts and a discussion ofnext stepsbetween Parks and Recreation staff and the Commission.
22
23Brokke provided a review of the latest diagrams from HCM, including:
24
25Site Opportunities Studypreviouslypresented by HCM atthe February 7, 2017 Commission Meeting
26Functional Plan Diagram
27Space “pods” can be moved into different configurations
o
28Design Option A(5,000 sq. ft.)
29New location located north of the existingClubhouse
o
30Design Option B (5,000 sq. ft.)
31New facility is placed in the same location as the existing Clubhouse
o
32Practice green and first tee would need to be moved or modified
o
33Outdoor gathering space maximizes views of the course
o
34Design Option C (5,000 sq. ft.)
35Expanded and redesigned parking lot
o
36The Clubhouse would be located next to theexisting maintenance facility
o
37Practicegreenand firsttee would be relocated
o
38Design Option B-Revised (3,200 sq. ft.)
39Revised design based on identifiedfunding
o
40Course modifications could be completed at a later date
o
41The parking lot would be expanded on the south end
o
42
43Brokke explained that the City Councilis currently contemplating the location of the Roseville License
44Center. As part of thatpotentialproject they are looking at including the Historical Society in that process.
45Further guidance on the Historical Society and the Cedarholm Clubhouse Renewalwill be discussed with
46the City Council.
47
48Parking Lot Options
49Varying from 68-94 spaces
o
50Maintenance Building Options
51Potential locations of a new maintenance building and covered cart storage
o
52The typical costper sq. ft. for Clubhouse projects range from$380-$420. Based on this cost estimate a
533,200 sq. ft. building would cost $1,216,000 to $1,344,000. The larger 5,000 sq. ft. building would be
54$1,900,000 to $2,100,000. These estimates are only for the building costs. Theydo not factor in site costs
55(exterior gathering space, parking lot expansion, utilities and golf course modifications) orplanning and
56managementcosts (typically 7-10% of the total project cost).
57
58The major differencein the two sq. ft. options are thesize of the community gathering space. The larger
59building (5,000 sq. ft.) would allow for80-100 peoplein the gathering space. Whereas the 3,200 sq. ft.
60building would accommodate 60 people –similar to Roseville’scurrent rentable Park Buildings.
61
62Brokke reviewedtheCedarholmAdvisory Teamrecommendations:
63-Maximize use of current funding for Clubhouse, estimated amounts include:
64Park Dedication: $1,300,000
o
65Renewal: $400,000
o
66Fund balance of the Golf Course: $200,000
o
67Estimated total of $1,900,000
o
68-Consider all funding options, including levy and bonding if necessary
69-Partnerships/collaborations
70-Consider gaps in Community Facilities and other uses
71Consider not only the immediate future but also the long-termfunctionality
o
72-Plan for supporting infrastructure
73Considerancillary areas duringthe planning process
o
74
75Staff is planning to seek guidance from the City Council at their work session onMonday,March 20, 2017.
76Topics of discussion will include the following:
77Project Scope
78Project Budget
79Funding Sources
80Historical SocietyConsideration
81Other Discussion
82
83Commissioner O’Brien noted that the Historical Society’sinclusionwould impact the design of Cedarholm.
84Vice-Commissioner Gelbach added that there could potentiallybe more visibility for the Historical Society
85if it werepart of the License Center. He also added that he would like to see the Cedarholm maintenance
86project completed now, asit may be years before that aspect of the project could be completedin the future.
87
88Brokke confirmed that theRoseville Historical Society is a valuable asset to the Community. They are
89valued by the City of Roseville and the Parks and Recreation Department. To date, they have not had the
90office and display space to flourish andpotentiallygarner additional members.
91
92The Commission discussed that the3,200 sq. ft.building would meet the needs of Cedarholm as a
93Clubhouse. However, the 5,000 sq. ft.building would fill a specific need for meeting space size due to the
94100person seating capacity,making it a Community Building that would be available to the Roseville
95Community year-round.
96
97Commissioner O’Brien statedthat there are two different visionsor paths to consider when thinking about
98next steps.
99
100Commissioner Bole relayed that he does feel that the Historical Society and Cedarholm are an odd
101combination. Brokke explained thatthe Historical Society’s lack of spacewas seen as a gap in the
102community.
103
104Stoner pointed out thatmost potential scenarioswould require askingthe City Council for additional money
105to complete the project.Brokke confirmed that some scenarios would require additional money. He noted
that if you utilized all of the available Park Dedication money there would not be any available for future
106
107projects, including development of 1716 Marion Street.In addition, if all of the Golf Course Fundsare
108utilized -would it still beconsideredan Enterprise Fund?
109
110Commissioner Stoner reiterated that the Commission hadpreviously recommended that Cedarholm Golf
111Course should not be an Enterprise Fund.
112
ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
1135.
114Brokke extended a “Thank You”to Commissioner Diedrickfor her 6 years of service on the Roseville Parks
115and Recreation Commission. She has been a great asset to the Commission andtheCommunity.
116
Commission Recommendation:
117
118Commissioner Bolemoved to recommend Vice-Commissioner Gelbach as thenewChair of the Roseville
119Parks and Recreation Commission. Commissioner O’Brien seconds.Motion passed unanimously.
120
121Commissioner Diedrick nominatedCommissioner O’Brien fortheposition ofVice-Chair of the Roseville
122Parks and Recreation Commission. Motion passed unanimously.
123
STAFF REPORT
1246.
125Review of the 2017 Parks and RecreationFocus:
126Execute a safe and successful deer reduction effort
o
127CedarholmGolf Course Clubhouse planning, design and begin replacement
o
128Central Park Bocce Ball reconstruction in partnership with the Roseville Central Park
o
129Foundation
130Community Park Planning
o
131Youth Outreach Program for Marion/Brittany area youth
o
132Emerald Ash Borer monitoring, education and response
o
133Strengthen the Natural Resources Stewardship Program
o
134Work with Recycling Program to pilot and expand recycling in parks as practical and
o
135appropriate
136Refine and stabilize overall Parks and Recreation operations as a result of the Renewal
o
137Program improvements
138Continue Asset Management and Infrastructure Program
o
139The OVAL ice season has ended.The skate park will be assembled for the summer season.
140Arts at the OVAL –Saturday, March 25, 2017 from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
141Tapping Time –Harriet Alexander Nature Center from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturday,March 25 and
142Sunday, March26,2017
143Spring/Summer Brochure will be mailed out on Friday, March 10, 2017
144Natural Resource Renewal Events:
145Materion Park-March 18, 2017 from10 a.m. to 12 p.m.
o
146Langton Lake Park –April 15, 2017 from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m.
o
147
148
149
150
OTHER
1517.
152Commissioner Warzecha notedthe large increasesin Park Building usage listed under the 2016 Parks and
153Recreation list of Accomplishments.
154
155Meeting adjourned at8:06pm
156
157Respectfully Submitted,
158Danielle Christensen,Department Assistant
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: 3/20/2017
Item No.:
Department Approval City Manager Approval
Item Description: Cedarholm Golf Course Clubhouse/Community Building Replacement Discussion
B
ACKGROUND
1
OnJanuary9, 2017, the Cityentered into an agreement with
2
3
4
On February 7, 2017, the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the site, building, and operational
5
goals based on the Resident Advisory Team Report and Recommendations (Advisory Team) and other
6
community and staff input.
7
8
On February 23, 2017 a community meeting was held at the Autumn Grove Park Building to present
9
progress on site options, functional plans and concept designs and listen to comments on what has been
10
completed so far. Seventeen people attended.
11
12
On March 7, 2017 the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed similar information to the
13
community meeting and provided input.
14
15
The following is a detailed listing of the progress information to date that is included in your packet
16
(dated March 7, 2017).
17
Site Opportunities Study
18
Functional Plan Diagram
19
Concept Design Option A
20
Concept Design Option B
21
Concept Design Idea – Option C
22
Preferred Concept Design Option B – Revised
23
Parking plan diagrams
24
Maintenance building site options
25
Space program summary and estimated costs based on a 3200 Sq. Ft. Clubhouse/Community
26
Building plus the 1430 desired Sq. Ft. for the Historical Society
27
Space program summary of estimated costs based on a 5000 Sq. Ft. Clubhouse/Community
28
Building plus the 1430 desired Sq. Ft. for the Historical Society
29
30
Staff will be prepared to provide you a brief overview at your meeting.
31
Page 1 of 3
32
The process thus far has been guided by the Advisory Team Report and Recommendations, the Parks
33
and Recreation Commission at their monthly meetings and additional community and staff input.
34
35
Overall,it appears that community desires, recommendations of the Advisory Team and the community
36
input since gathered are consistent with progress made.
37
38
Staff will be at your meeting to discussprogress to date and seek guidance in the following areas:
39
Project Scope
40
Project Budget
41
Funding Sources
42
Historical Society Considerations
43
Other
44
PO
OLICYBJECTIVE
45
It is the policy of the City to provide a community process and a thoughtful approach when making
46
improvements to City facilities.
47
FI
INANCIAL MPACTS
48
As identified in the 2016 Advisory Team Final Report, the recommended financial options to support
49
the capital needs of replacing the Cedarholm Golf Course Clubhouse/Maintenance Facility include the
50
following:
51
52
A.Maximize the use of current funding
53
The Advisory Team believes the clubhouse can be replacedwithout a tax levy increaseat
54
this time by using current Park Dedication funds, remaining Renewal Program funds and
55
using the Golf Course Fund balance.
56
If necessary, consider all funding options including a levy and bonding
57
58
B.If a levy is used, the Advisory Team strongly suggests identifying a sunset without renewal or
59
repurpose
60
Levy funding may be needed to support clubhouse operations if other uses, outside of
61
golf operations, are included in future plans for the clubhouse
62
63
C.Pursue partnerships and collaborations
64
Consider opportunities that could provide funding in exchange for use, philanthropic
65
consideration and naming rights
66
Grants and other opportunities
67
68
69
70
71
SR
TAFF ECOMMENDATION
72
Discussion and guidance suggested in the following areas:
73
Project Scope
74
Project Budget
75
Funding Sources
76
Page 2 of 3
Historical Society Considerations
77
Other
78
RCA
EQUESTED OUNCIL CTION
79
Discussion and guidance provided in the following areas:
80
Project Scope
81
Project Budget
82
Funding Sources
83
Historical Society Considerations
84
Other
85
86
Prepared by: Lonnie Brokke, Director of Parks and Recreation
Jill Anfang, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation
Attachment: A. Information PacketDated March 7, 2017
Page 3 of 3
2017
Clubhouse Renewal
,
7
March
ROSEVILLE
Review,
Park & Rec Commission
City of
Cedarholm
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
to the Clubhouse Entry
to the Clubhouse Entry
o be
ollocated and to be directly
o
ng
/ Desk/Retail functions t
Functional Goals
e
on
y
Entry from the sit
be
/ Retail Space for staffi
he
Entr
n
eparated from golf operati
rovide direct views to mai
Outdoor Gathering Space t
dditional Program Space:
spaces but
green and parking
staging area and connectsto be adjacent to t
o
ng
e
Society space t
golfer
views of the 1st tee,
hav
Community Gatheri
parking and Clubhouse
views of the site
Room to
Patio provide
and parking
ilize building
ommunity
lubhouse
Historical
acent
adjacent
ficiency
unctions
practice
imary
itchen
ntry
e
ry
ffice
eskpac
with
c
ent
adjand
m
ut
pr
beef
Csf
SA
P•EOKDC
a
••••••
r
g
a
i
OUTSIDE CART
D
STAGING
n
a
l
P
l
a
n
o
i
t
c
n
u
F
–
Clubhouse Renewal
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
CORRAL STORAGE
Cedarholm
OUTSIDE CART
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
Patio is a hub that links the Building
centrally located and providesGathering Space connects Entry
circulation is efficient and simple
Gathering Space are located to
located and easy to identify
to the parking and could have
strong presence to the site entry and
, practice Green,1st tee, and 9th
–
Entry and Entry Patio are
Gathering Space and
Concept Design Idea
Society spaces have a
views of the course
and Community Space
Hamline Avenue
A
Option A
prominently
own entry
Community
Clubhouse
maximize
presence
Historical
n Outdoor Outdoor
Building Building
o
Entry
Patio
green
i Entry
t
its
a
p
•••••••
O
n
g
i
s
e
D
t
p
STORAGE
CART
e
c
n
o
C
–
Clubhouse Renewal
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
Cedarholm
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
Gathering Space is located
Patio links the Building Entry,
–
to the parking and could
circulation is efficient and
Entry and Entry Patio are
Community Gathering Space has
Concept Design Idea
Society spaces have a
is located on existing
maximize views of the course
located and easy to
views of the course
Green and 1st tee
its own entry
Option B
prominently
building pad
Clubhouse
improved presence
Historical
Outdoor
B
Building practice Building
identify
simple
Entry
have
n
to
o
i
t
•••••••
p
O
n
g
i
s
STORAGE
CART
e
D
t
p
e
c
n
o
C
–
Clubhouse Renewal
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
Cedarholm
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
Patio links the Building Entry and access to the Practice Green and 1st
Gathering Space is expressed in the front façade of the buildingSociety spaces have a presence to the parking and could have its
is located to the north and adjacent to the Maintenance Building
Gathering Space is located to maximize views of the course
Option C
Entry and Entry Patio front the parking lot
C
n
o
i
circulation is efficient and simple
lot is reconfigured and expanded
t
p
views are focused on the course
O
–
Concept Design Idea
n
g
i
s
e
D
STORAGE
CART
t
p
Community
Clubhouse
Historical
e
own entry
Outdoor
Building Building
Parking
c
Entry
Site
n
tee
o
C
•••••••••
–
Clubhouse Renewal
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
Cedarholm
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
Parking lot Expansion
Focus of facility is the Entry Patio as
Gathering Space is located
Course modification
the Building Entry, practice
to the parking and could
circulation is efficient and
Entry and Entry Patio are
option based on budget
Community Gathering Space has
Historical society
Society spaces have a
is located on existing
maximize views of the course
located and easy to
phased approach for the
Practice Green
n
views of the course
d
o
Preferred Option
i
e
t
s
i
p
v
its own entry
and 1st tee
O
e
----
R
n
prominently
-
building pad
Clubhouse
g
improved presence
Historical
Reduced
:
i
Outdoor
B
Building Building
following
itlinks
s Allows
Green
identify
simple
have
e
to
D
Concept
•••••••••
STORAGE
CART
d
e
r
r
e
f
e
r
P
–
Clubhouse Renewal
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
Cedarholm
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
s
m
a
r
g
a
i
D
n
o
i
t
p
O
n
a
l
P
g
n
i
k
r
a
P
–
Clubhouse Renewal
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
Cedarholm
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
Maintenance
•New maintenance building located against Hamline Ave
Maintenance
•New Maintenance Building rotated to West of existing
•Addition of new golf cart storage along Hamline Ave
•Maintenance yard remains as currently constituted
•Keeps Maintenance building in the same location
s
•Maintenance yard between two new structures•Maintenance yard between two new structures
n
Addition of new golf cart storage to West of
o
Existing
i
t
p
•New golf cart storage to West of
O
g
n
i
d
l
i
Building location.Building location.
u
B
Option 1Option 2Option 3
e
location
c
n
a
n
•
e
t
n
i
a
M
–
Clubhouse Renewal
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
Cedarholm
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
. This is typical commercial wood frame construction
Exterior gathering space (Patio with overhead structure, fire pit and planters) : Estimate 1,200 SF = $80,000 to $100,000
Parking Lot Expansion : Estimate ($4,000 per stall or $13 per SF) = For Expansion to South Only = 4,200 SF = $55,000
y
r
a
m
m
u
S
m
a
r
GSF
g
GSF
GSF
1,100 NSF2,760 NSF
At 3,200 SF the owner should expect pricing from $1,216,000 to $ 1,344,000
Utilities (New water service if required for sprinkler system) : Estimate = $40,000
120 NSF120 NSF120 NSF400 NSF400 NSF300 NSF200 NSF
o
3,200
440 SF
r
1,430 4,630
At 4,630 SF the owner should expect pricing from $1,759,400 to $1,944,600
P
$420 per SF range
e
.
c
.B.D
a
p
T
Golf Course modifications (Tees and Green Work) : Estimate =
S
City of Roseville Budget Basis of Analysis
-
Clubhouse Renewal
includes circulation, walls, etc.)
(Gross Square Footage)
-
$380
Site work costs (in Addition to Building Costs):
including a kitchen and some better quality finishes.
Typical costs / SF for Clubhouse projects are in the
Park & Rec Commission Review
5.Community Gathering Space (60 Person)
Clubhouse
otal SF with Additional Program Space
Additional Program Space Program
Total NSF (Net Square Footage)
in Counter
-
6.Toilets and Changing Space
GSFConceptual Cost Estimate
-
3.Retail / Merchandise Area
8.Building Services SpaceFactor (15%
Historical Society Space
Total Base Program
Clubhouse Renewal :
–
1.Green Fee/Check
2.Manager’s Office
7.Storage Space
Cedarholm
GSF
City of Roseville
NSF to
4.Kitchen
March 7, 2017
T
Cedarholm
9.
••••••
. This is typical commercial wood frame construction
Exterior gathering space (Patio with overhead structure, fire pit and planters) : Estimate 1,200 SF = $80,000 to $100,000
Parking Lot Expansion : Estimate ($4,000 per stall or $13 per SF) = For Expansion to South Only = 4,200 SF = $55,000
y
r
a
m
m
u
S
m
a
r
GSF
g
SFGSF
1,800 NSF4,200 NSF
At 5,000 SF the owner should expect pricing from $1,900,000 to $ 2,100,000
Utilities (New water service if required for sprinkler system) : Estimate = $40,000
200 NSF200 NSF200 NSF700 NSF500 NSF400 NSF200 NSF
o
G
5,000
800 SF
1,430 6,470
r
At 6,470 SF the owner should expect pricing from $2,458,000 to $2,717,400
P
$420 per SF range
e
.
c
.D
a
.B
p
T
Golf Course modifications (Tees and Green Work) : Estimate =
S
-
Clubhouse Renewal
includes circulation, walls, etc.)
(Gross Square Footage)
-
$380
Site work costs (in Addition to Building Costs):
including a kitchen and some better quality finishes.
Typical costs / SF for Clubhouse projects are in the
100 Person)
Advisory Team Basis of Analysis
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse
Total SF with Additional Program Space
Additional Program Space Program
–
5.Community Gathering Space (80
Total NSF (Net Square Footage)
in Counter
-
6.Toilets and Changing Space
GSF
Conceptual Cost Estimate
-
3.Retail / Merchandise Area
8.Building Services SpaceFactor (18%
Historical Society Space
Total Base Program
Clubhouse Renewal :
–
1.Green Fee/Check
2.Manager’s Office
7.Storage Space
Cedarholm
GSF
City of Roseville
NSF to
4.Kitchen
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
9.
••••••
!
You
Thank
Park & Rec Commission Review
Clubhouse Renewal :
City of Roseville
March 7, 2017
Cedarholm
United States
Department of
Agriculture
March 1, 2017
Animal and
Plant Health
Inspection
Service
Wildlife Services
644 Bayfield St.
Suite 215
St. Paul, MN55107
651-224-6027Phone
651-224-4271FAX
City of Roseville, MN
To whom it may concern,
Attached is our harvest report for the 2016-17 City of Roseville deer control project.
We were able to remove the permitted amount of 20 deer in one night of shooting.
Deer were removed at 3 of the 4 selected sites (Owasso, the Nature Center, and the
leaf compost site). The level of deer activity at our baits appeared to indicate high
deer numbers in the city with many other deer being observed at the sites that were
not removed through our efforts. After removal, deer were donated to needy
individuals around the metro area.
Please call or e-mail with additional questions.
Thanks,
Ben Welinski
Ben Welinski
Wildlife Specialist
USDA/APHIS/Wildlife Services
644 Bayfield St. Suite 215
St. Paul, MN 55107
Office: (651) 224-6027
Fax: (651) 224-4271
Safeguarding American Agriculture
APHIS is an agency of USDA’s Marketing and Regulatory Programs
An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
. We also observed a substantial number of deer
Broken & healed front leg, possible vehicle collision
sion
Four of the deer also showed injuries that are possibly related to deer/vehicle
deer targeted. Anecdotally, this appears to indicate an
at this time of year. With 4 of the 7 Adult females having
which most metro deer
Broken & healed rear leg, possible vehicle colli
had been previously Shot with .177 pellets
as observed during
Project
Deer
th of the deer. In a healthy herd,
Dislocated front shoulder
fat
/Winter 201
ate a less than healthy population. Most deer also showed minimal body
tion of overabundance in the City
Notes
based on the permitted number of
Fall
heal
Male 1 Female 1 Male 1 Female 1
be carrying two fawns
Roseville
Fetus Count
can provide some indication of the
Female 1
Male 2
Male 1
in questionable health that still remains in the City.
Male 1
of
NoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNone
City
NANANANANANA
.
herd
be an indica
Deer Disposition from
to
less than healthy
Female Female Female Female Female emale Female Female FemaleFemaleFemale Female FemaleFemale
most adult females
MaleMaleMaleMaleMaleMale
Sex
,
at and around the bait sites and in the area that were not removed
F
may also
Juvenile JuvenileJuvenile Juvenile JuvenileJuvenileJuvenile Juvenile
AdultAdultAdultAdultAdultAdultAdultAdultAdultAdultAdultAdult
count from the females
Age
This
indication of a
Programs
populations can be considered, you would expect
1/31/2017 1/31/20171/31/2017 1/31/2017 1/31/20171/31/2017 1/31/2017 1/31/2017 1/31/2017 1/31/2017 1/31/2017 1/31/20171/31/2017 1/31/20171/31/20171/31/2017 1/31/20171/31/2017 1/31/20171/31/2017
interactions with people.
Date
only a single fetus or no fetus, this may indic
APHIS is an agency of USDA’s Marketing and Regulatory
possible
An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
365496 365495365494 365493 365492365491 365490 365489 365488 365487 365486 365485365484 365483365482365481 365480365479 365478365477
he fetus
Tag #
deer population
cleaning/processing, another
Safeguarding American Agriculture
T
General Observations:
negative
Permit #
2171921719217192171921719217192171921719217192171921719217192171921719217192171921719217192171921719
overabundant
llisions or
hone
55107
X
FA
644 Bayfield St.
Wildlife Services
P
t of
United States
60274271
Animal and
St. Paul, MN
Plant Health
Agriculture
Departmen
co
Inspection
Suite 215
--
224224
Service
--
651651
Resolution endorsing the protection of bees and other pollinators and
the enhancement of pollinator habitat in the City of Roseville, Minnesota.
DRAFT
WHEREAS,
the City of Roseville has many established programs and practices that help protect
pollinators, including preservation of natural areas, enhancing habitat and use of native plants in
gardens and plantings, limited use of insecticides and herbicides in the landscape, pollinator
education and outreach to the community; and
WHEREAS,
native bees, honey bees and other pollinators are a necessary component of a
healthy ecosystem and food system, providing essential pollination of plants in order to grow
vegetables, herbs, and fruits; and
WHEREAS,
pollinator populations are in sharp decline due to an ongoing loss of habitat as a
result of human land use practices, coupled with a simultaneous pesticide use by homeowners,
landscapers, and property managers; and
WHEREAS,
neonicotinoid (neonic) and other systemic pesticides have been shown to cause
illness and death to bees and other pollinators; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council finds it is in the public interest to demonstrate its commitment to
a safe and healthy community environment through the implementation of practices that protect
pollinators on city parks, open spaces, and city property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
for and on behalf of The City of Roseville,
Minnesota and its citizens that:
The City of Roseville is hereby declared a Pollinator-Friendly Community. The City celebrates
current practices that protect and support pollinator health, and encourages residents and
businesses to adopt pollinator-friendly practices.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT:
The City shall undertake its best efforts to advance its
status as a pollinator-friendly City by furthering best management practices to protect pollinators
on public lands within the City; and:
1.The City shall review its practices for the use of insecticides and use best practices to
limit systemic insecticide uses on city property including insecticides from the
neonicotinoid family where possible and will encourage commercial applications to be
free of systemic insecticides including neonicotinoids where possible.
2.The City shall undertake its best efforts to plant native plants and plants favorable to bees
and other pollinators in the City's public spaces.
3.The City shall undertake its best efforts to communicate to all Roseville property owners,
residents, businesses, institutions and neighborhoods the importance of creating and
maintaining pollinator-friendly habitat and will encourage residents and business to use
Roseville Pollinator Resolution - 3-30-17 Copy
1
pollinator-friendly practices including:
Reducing the use pesticides, including systemic insecticides, on their property;
Avoiding planting flowering plants that are treated with systemic insecticides;
Planting more pollinator forage on their property and adopting organic or
chemical-free lawn and landscaping practices.
Roseville Pollinator Resolution - 3-30-17 Copy
2
From:noreply@civicplus.com \[mailto:noreply@civicplus.com\]
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 8:27 AM
To: *RVParksCommission <*RVParksCommission@metro-inet.us>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Contact Parks and Recreation Commission
Contact Parks and Recreation Commission
Please complete this online form and submit.
Subject:
temporary labyrinths in roseville parks
Contact Information
Name:
roger hess jr
Address:
1906 wagener place
City:
roseville
State:
MN
Zip:
55113
How would you prefer to
No need to contact me
be contacted? Remember
to fill in the
corresponding contact
information in the fields
below.
Phone Number:
6512706910
Email Address:
rogerhessjr@aol.com
Please Share Your
https://www.labyrinthcompany.com/collections/floor-and-plaza-
Comment, Question or
kitscommission member, i made this suggestion when you
Concern
were building thenew parks buildings, and i would like to make
the same suggestion again. when you built the new parks
buildings there were large areas of concrete poured. these
would be the perfect location for temporary labyrinths, that
could be created by local artists, who i assume would be happy
to donate their time and skills. i have included a link to a
website showing many labyrinth designs, including small ones
that people place inside of their homes. i envision them being
created by local artists, using easily removed paint or chalk,
and depending on how many artists are interested, you could
From:noreply@civicplus.com \[mailto:noreply@civicplus.com\]
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 11:12 AM
To: *RVParksCommission <*RVParksCommission@metro-inet.us>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Contact Parks and Recreation Commission - Dog Park
Contact Parks and Recreation Commission
Please complete this online form and submit.
Subject:
A new dog park, that is usable
Contact Information
Name:
Ann Graham
Address:
1214 W Roselawn Ave
City:
Roseville
State:
MN
Zip:
55113
How would you prefer to
Email
be contacted? Remember
to fill in the
corresponding contact
information in the fields
below.
Phone Number:
6512100509
Email Address:
castlegraham@gmail.com
Please Share Your
I would like to know how to get the ball rolling on getting
Comment, Question or
Roseville a great dog park. One that has room for the owner
Concern
and dogs to get exercise and that is completely fenced. Just so
you know the small enclosure is way to small. Can't get a good
run and the small space leads to dog conflicts. The bigger one
is not completely fenced in. It is open to Larpenture on one side
and it butts up to a swamp, a swamp we are not supposed to
enter but again not fenced. You could maybe walka little bit
more but half of the land is covered by downed trees and is not
navigable. Please let me know who I talk to so I can start
petitioning for new dog park. Thank You, Ann Graham 651-
210-0509
27th annual
Saturday, April 22, 2017
Enjoy guided tours of the
BOARDWALK
with a
Honor ARBOR DAY free tree
seedling
Free seed packets
Activities, crafts and games
Planting for butterflies
Music by
Will Hale and the Tadpole Pa-
rade
H A N C
ARRIETLEXANDERATUREENTER
(651) 765-HANC (4262)