HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCPR-04-24-12 Carmel /Clay Board of Parks and Recreation
Park Board Meeting
6:00 p.m.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Monon Community Center East
1235 Central Park Drive East
Carmel, IN 46032
The Carmel /Clay Board of Parks and Recreation will govern in a proactive manner as it applies to providing safe and well
maintained parks, recreation facilities and programs in a fiduciary and responsible manner. The Board is a policy governing
board, fulfilling its duties as mandated by state statute, putting the welfare of the citizens of Carmel and Clay Township first,
and enabling staff to manage the park and recreation system in a manner that reflects the vision and mission. Our promise
to our citizens is that we will leave the parks and recreation system better than we found it.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
I. Roll CaII
II. CaII to Order Pledge of Allegiance
III. Public Comments
IV. Staff Reports
V. Action Items
A. Minutes Richard Leirer
1. April 10, 2012 Park Board Meeting; and
2. April 11, 2012 Special Park Board Meeting.
B. Financial Reports Richard F. Taylor III
1. City of Carmel Financial Report; and
2. CCPR P &L Statements.
0 C. Claims Richard F. Taylor III
1. Claim Sheet April 24, 2012; and
2. Clay Township Claim Sheet April 24, 2012.
D. Consideration of Matters Regarding Central Park:
1. Eastside Development Project Mark Westermeier;
2. Waterpark Enhancement Project Mark Westermeier; and
3. Drainage and Overflow Parking Project Mark Westermeier.
VI. Discussion items /Board Comments
VII. Adjournment
(Approved:
CARMEL /CLAY BOARD OF PARKS AND RECREATION
BOARD MEETING MINUTES
Regular Meeting
April 24, 2012, 6:00 P.M.
Monon Community Center East
1235 Central Park Drive East
CARMEL, IN 46032
MEMBER ATTENDEES MEMBER ABSENTEES OTHERS
D Cihak Hansen P Knowles M Westermeier
J Engledow M Klitzing
W Franklin, A Kostrzewa
J Kirsh D Grisham
J Kristunas f s Members of the Public
R Leirer Hal Espey (Videographer)
L Rude?w
R Taylor
I. ROLL CALL
The regular board meeting of the Carmel /Clay Board of�Parks and Recreation was at approximately
6:00 p.m. on April 24, 2012 pursuant to notice. PresidentlJ`Engledo to; asked R Leirer call the roll. Members
present other than J Engledow and R Leirer w k�`H
ere D Cihaansen 'W Franklin, J Kirsh; J'Kristunas, L Rude
and R Taylor. P Knowles was absent. Others' in attendance are noted above.
11. CALL TO ORDER And PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, z
Having confirmed the presence of a quorum and after the Pledge of Allegiance, President Engledow called the
meeting to order.
P
NOTE: Hereinafter these `minutes will state the motion followed parenthetically by the name of the one who
made the motion (listed fist) >and then`tl e one who seconded it. For example the motion would read, "It was
moved to approve the minutes (Taylor Kirsh) 'When a motion is carried but not unanimously, the results
of the vote will Ii
be,saylor, Kirsh) �6pto 2 with 'one When the motion was carried
.x'NS 4� -fit ted r i.e (T� b
unanimously a C -Un t will be addetl i.e. (Taylor, Kirsh��C- .Un)."
new tis
III. PUBLICCOMMENTS President Engledow noted that the had received 4 public comment cards and would ask
that in keep ng?with the last meeting, he would allow a little longer presentation for the first speaker and asked
that subsequent speakers keep their;remarks toaa reasonable length of time. He noted that the Park Board
would not engagethe speakers. t
A. Sue Dillon, 507 Cornwall Court Camel, IN 46032, made the following points with pictures:
1. Announced the Foundation Fantasia event on May 18, 2012 to raise money for parks and encouraged all to
attend;
2. She did not know about theSpecial Park Board meeting on April 11, 2012 to discuss a Dog Park in the
Meadow south of the Meeting House;
3. She commended the Park Board for moving ahead with the Dog Park but took issue with the Dog Park
Feasibility Study, including the following points:
a. She described the Park Board Vision and the Central Park Master Plan process that involved vast
community input resulting in the need for more free meeting space for community not for profit groups.
b. The location within Central Park initially considered for a dog park did not work in the end and the
Meeting House property was not then considered for such a use;
c. Pictures of an existing private, fenced bark park within a multifamily residential development were used
to refute the Study's conclusion that a dog park should avoid residential developments.
d. With respect to the current scout use of the Meeting House and nearby wooded campsite, placement of
a dog park in the Meadow would interfere with the free not for profit use of the Meeting House previously
established by the Park Board;
e. The Scouts made the North Campus woods beautiful and as the woods is more private than Camp
Belzer, an official Boy Scout camp, the North Campus Woods is the better location for the scouts.
1
f. A dog park in the Meadow by the Meeting House conflicts with Scout use of the whole property for a
complete scouting experience: the Meeting House, the Meadow and the campsite.
g. Meadowlark Park has enough acreage for a dog park north of the playground with no conflict of use
despite the proximity of the apartments, which, she contended, was not an issue based on the location of
the private bark park.
4. If the Meadow is used as a dog park, it will no longer be available to the Scouts who will then be without an
alternative camping site within Clay Township.
5. Asked that the Park Board consider a dog park at Meadowlark Park, Cherry Tree Park and West Park, put
the dog park development at the Meeting House location on hold and allow the scouts to be part of any
process involving reuse of the Meeting House property.
B. Mike Elliott, 341 Holden Court, Carmel IN 46032, Scoutmaster of Troup #136, made the following comments:
1. The Meeting House and Meadow and woods provide a unique setting for the scouts close to home;
2. His troup uses the daylights out of the meadow;
3. He described and showed pictures of scout events inside�the Meeting House;
4. The Meeting House is not easy to reserve:
i. The online reservation form does not provide the space necessary to describe requested use;
ii. The Park staff is not helpful regarding key pickup
iii. He doesn't know how to get in touch with the right people;
5. His troup uses the meadow for everything exceptrpitching tents;
6. He heard that there would be paving. °c>
7. A dog park will ruin the space. xr,
C. Helen Metken, 963 Hawthorne Drive, Carme!, IN 46033, BoyScouf Troup #131, made tt e following points:
1. Provided copies of completed Spec al IUsea ,Requests used &to reserve the Meeting House and /or campsite in
the past;
2. As a regular user, she did not know aboutthe Special .Park Board meeting on April 11, 2012;
2. Regular users should have been notified a the proposed use andthe April 11 meeting;
3. The Meeting House space is not.marketed and te` it is noasy:to reserve;
4. The campsite was the resultoftan�Eagle Scoutprofect`x
5. Her troup has hosted large eventsjor up to 95'
6. No less than 7 troup`s, use the facility.:
D. Peter Isenberg 13999 Staghorn Courtt Carmel IN 46033, affiliated with the Boy Scouts, made the following
1. The�sco pp
uts have usedthe Meeting House aroximately 15 times over the last 4 years;
2. Stumbled across the action takenwon the dog par °a couple of weeks prior, surprised that the scouts were
not notified;
3. The Meeting House is valuable for scout recruiting events, especially since the schools restricted use to
prohibit recruiting;
4. West Park is the location for the dog park
5. Suggested that4the,Carmel ClayE;Schools Trades Class may be able to remodel the Meeting House;
4. No other property ft Carmel s usable for the scouts as this one has been.
AV
Noting that he had no other speakerrequests, he thanked the public who attended and announced that the Park
Board will not take action on this matter at tonight's meeting.
IV. STAFF REPORTS
After noting that the standard reports which would have been included in the April 10 Board Packet but for the
timing, were included in the April 24, 2012 Board Packet, Michael offered to answer any questions regarding the
same. Michael next explained that he had distributed to the Park Board members, a compilation of email
communications regarding the dog park as well as a summary of Special Use Requests for the Central Park
North Campus properties. Discussion ensued regarding the public comments with the following highlights:
The Department was not aware that the scout leaders considered the Meadow part of the Echo Ridge Campsite
and as the Meadow had not been mowed, it was not intuitive that it was being used. M Westermeier reported
that in the last week he had received 6 email communications from dog park supporters and only 1 from a scout
supporter. He noted that he had not heard from the scouts until Friday, April 20 to which he replied that he
would review the Department's Special Use Request records to confirm that the scouts who used the Meeting
House and Echo Ridge Campsite had also reserved the Meadow. He noted that he had received an apology
2
from a scout representative for not confirming prior to distribution, the legitimacy of all information included in a
mass email, such as razing the Meeting House, and looked forward to a promised retraction.
V. ACTION ITEMS
A. Minutes Richard Leirer
1. April 10, 2012 Regular Park Board Meeting Minutes were approved after correcting the members
present to include L Rude. (Leirer, Kristunas C -Un.)
2. April 11, 2012 Regular Park Board Meeting Minutes were approved as presented. Leirer, Kristunas
C -Un.)
B. Financial Reports Richard F. Taylor, III
1. City of Carmel Financial Report Receipt was acknowledged presented (Taylor, Franklin C -Un.);
2. CCPR P &L Statement Receipt was acknowledged as presented (Taylor, Kristunas C -Un.)
C. Claims Richard F. Taylor III
1. Claim Sheet April 24, 2012 was approved as presented "(Taylor, Cihak Hansen C -Un.)
2. Clay Township Claim Sheet April 24, 2012 was app ved aspresented after Mark explained that
Brandt Construction, substantially completed the�,Water Park EriIjancement Project by April 15 to
qualify for payment of the $20,000 Superior.TithevManagement Allowance and while the contract
provided that it was to be paid after release of. the retainage, he recomr fended that the Park Board
release it on this claim sheet. (Taylor, Cihak Hansen 7 in favor with 1 abstention (J Engledow.))
D. Consideration of Matters Regarding Central Park 4 ;;Mark rioted there was no faction item to present
for any of the following projects.
1. Eastside Development Project MarkWestermeier4
2. Water Park Enhancement Project 7 Mark Westermeier
3. Drainage and Overflow Parking Project"— Mark Westermeier
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS /BOARD
A. J Engledow noted that he considered the Saturday Orientation have been very successful. He noted that
in keeping with the Park'Board discussion, that aftertle second meeting in May, there would be a historical
review of some of the`srrialler park sites w ith review>,of the larger park sites to occur during another Saturday
session.
B. J Kirsh apologized for missing the`Orientation and explained that he had gone to St. Louis on site visits with
the Plan- Com
C. R Taylor. said that hetwasi not awareethat the scouts using the field south of the Meeting House. He
asked rf the dog park proceeds there;4hether the field behind the Administrative Offices could be used by
the scouts to which Mark responded inrthe negative noting that it was not accessible.
D. M Westermeier noted that the Scouts have not filed requests for all of the uses that were mentioned earlier
by the scout leadership. Win'
E. R Leirer stated that he believed the Park Board should take into consideration the substantial use of the
Meeting House and surrounding property by the scouts.
F. M Westermeier explained, that the Central Park Master Plan preceded the acquisition of the properties along
116 Street.
G. After some discussion regarding next steps, confirmation that Staff was waiting for The Schneider
Corporation to provide the proposal for preparation of construction documents, and how to provide
communication to the scouts, the Park Board heeded President Engledow's earlier statement that it would
not take action on this matter at this meeting and concluded discussion.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
The Meeting adjourned at approximately 7:15 p.m. (Taylor, Kirsh, without objection.)
Signature: Date:
Signature: Date:
3