University Park Recreation District

Consideration of the Minutes of the April 9, 2021 Board of Supervisors Meeting

MINUTES OF MEETING

UNIVERSITY PARK RECREATION DISTRICT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING
Friday, April 9, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. University Park Country Club
7671 The Park Blvd, University Park, FL 32401

Board Members present at roll call:
James Case	Chairperson
Steve Ludmerer	Vice Chairperson
Sally Dickson	Assistant Secretary
Karen Pagano	2nd Vice Chairperson
Bill DiPaolo	Treasurer

Also, Present:
Vivian Carvalho		District Manager - PFM Group Consulting LLC Venessa Ripoll	Assistant District Manager-PFM Group Consulting LLC (via phone)
Mark Barnebey	District Counsel- Blalock Walters Law Firm Laurie Evans	General Manager- Country Club
Curtis Nickerson	Director of Properties & Facilities- Country Club John Fetsick	Director of Finance- Country Club
Rico Alcala	Director of Operations- Country Club John Scott	Fawley Bryant
Aaron Jacobson	Fawley Bryant
Emmett Gregory	Kimley Horn & Associates
Chris Ciantaglione	Kimley Horn & Associates Various Members of the General Public

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Call to Order and Roll Call

The meeting was called to order at 1:02 p.m. by Mr. Case.	Ms. Carvalho notated that quorum was confirmed to proceed with the Board of Supervisors Meeting.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Organizational Matters Opening Comments
Mr. Case provided opening remarks for the Board of Supervisors meeting.

Public Comments

Mr. Carlin had specific comments regarding croquet. The University Park County Club is the only Country Club in the area with croquet and he wishes to retain croquet in the University Park County Club.

Ms. Bertsch raised concerns about the finance of the community and the costs associated with the proposed improvements to the University Park County Club. She was informed some homeowners are considering moving due to concerns about the future cost of living in the University Park Recreation District.

Ms. VanBrunt invited everyone to attend “Art in the Park” when the meeting has concluded.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Administrative Matters

Consideration of the Minutes of the March 2, 2021 Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting

The Board reviewed the minutes of the March 2, 2021 Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting.

ON MOTION by Ms. Dickson, seconded by Ms. Pagano, with all in favor, the Board approved the March 2, 2021 Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting Minutes.

Consideration of the Minutes of the March 9, 2021 Continued Board of Supervisors’ Meeting

The Board reviewed the minutes of the March 9, 2021 Continued Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting.

ON MOTION by Ms. Dickson, seconded by Mr. Ludmerer, with all in favor, the Board approved the March 9, 2021 Continued Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting Minutes.

Consideration of the Minutes of the March 9, 2021 Finance

Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting

The minutes of the March 9, 2021 Finance Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting will be addressed at the May Meeting.

Consideration of the Minutes of the March 12, 2021 Board of Supervisors’ Meeting

The Board reviewed the minutes of the March 12, 2021 Board of Supervisors’ Meeting.

ON MOTION by Ms. Pagano, seconded by Ms. Dickson, with all in favor, the Board approved the Minutes of the March 12, 2021 Board of Supervisors’ Meeting.

Consideration of the Minutes of the March 16, 2021 Finance Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting

The Board reviewed the minutes of the March 16, 2021 Finance Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting.

ON MOTION by Mr. Ludmerer, seconded by Mr. DiPaolo, with all in favor, the Board approved the Minutes of the March 16, 2021 Finance Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting.

Consideration of the Minutes of the March 23, 2021 Finance Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting

The Board reviewed the minutes of the March 23, 2021 Finance Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting.

ON MOTION by Mr. DiPaolo, seconded by Mr. Ludmerer, with all in favor, the Board approved the Minutes of the March 23, 2021 Finance Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting.

Consideration of the Minutes of the March 24, 2021 Special Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting

The Board reviewed the minutes of the March 24, 2021 Special Board of Supervisors’ Meeting.

ON MOTION by Ms. Dickson, seconded by Mr. Ludmerer, with all in favor, the Board approved the Minutes of the March 24, 2021 Special Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting.

Consideration of the Minutes of the March 30, 2021 Finance Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting

The minutes of the March 30, 2021 Finance Volunteer Group Workshop Meeting will be addressed at the May meeting.

Consideration of the Minutes of the April 1, 2021 Special Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting

The Board reviewed the minutes of the April 1, 2021 Special Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting.

ON MOTION by Ms. Dickson, seconded by Ms. Pagano, with all in favor, the Board approved the Minutes of the April 1, 2021 Special Board of Supervisors’ Workshop Meeting.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Business Matters

Public Hearing on Adopting Revised Rules of Procedure Pertaining Membership Categories and Amounts
Presentation of Dues and Fees
Public Comments and Testimony
Board Comments

Mr. Case provided some thoughts about the proposed fees and recommended continuing this public hearing to April 20, 2021. Mr. Case requested a motion to open the Public Hearing.

ON MOTION by Mr. Ludmerer, seconded by Ms. Dickson, with all in favor, the Board opened the Public Hearing.

Mr. DiPaolo raised the comments on membership dues.

The dues and the bonds each accomplish a different objective. The UPRD uses the bond funds for major innovative capital projects. The dues are used to operate the Club, offset the cost of amenities and to build the capital reserves for routine replacements, maintenance projects as the District move forward. The District needs $1,000,000.00 each year to maintain the University Park County Club. The UPCC must build its own capital reserves through the dues structure.

Mr. Ludmerer provided some history with the University Park County Club. The primary focus as a Board should be to put a master plan in place, communicate its benefits, and secure the commitment of the residents and members to finance its implementation. He echoed Mr. DiPaolo’ s comment. The UPRD needs about $1,000,000.00 per year to sustain its long-term health. There are three levels of capital to meet the District’s needs. They include (1) the capital from the original bond proceeds to support Phase 1 of the Master Plan, (2) a bond or assessment which will be needed for the major renovations being considered in Phase 2, and a capital contribution from dues to replace routine aging equipment (kitchen appliances, roofs, HVAC, etc.). The Proposed Membership Plan was intended to accomplish approximately $600,000.00 - $700,000.00 of the $1,000,000.00 per year with the other one-third from unidentified sources. Mr. Ludmerer suggested all residents contribute. Another approach might be to keep the annual dues at the current level and add a capital due bill every year. Instead, the Finance Committee looked at the allocation mechanism of 7% of dues to be sequestered for capital reserve and 10% of

outside play, food and beverage, and 100% of initiation fees to be sequestered to get toward the $1,000,000.00 total , which got to $600,000.00. Mr. Ludmerer also provided some history of the Club since the bonds were issued and provided some data.

Ms. Evans provided some feedback from everyone. She provided the history of the Membership Planning Group. The Membership Plan was created using surveys and focus groups. She provided a summary of the previous Membership Plan and included the feedback the Planning Group had to consider. She also outlined the proposed membership categories.

Mr. Case opened the floor for general public comments regarding this agenda item.

Mr. Rezano, a homeowner, stated not eliminating the food and beverage minimum is a smart plan. He suggested University Park County Club should create a separate capital fund and put a line item on every monthly due and make it restrictive. Capital money that member pays does not have a sales tax, but sales tax is paid on operations. The Membership Planning group will look into that.

Mr. Brandy echoed Mr. Rezano. The University Park County Club should separate capital into a reserve fund. Mr. Brandy asked if the $1,000,0000 in question is for operations, capital, or both. Mr. Fetsick responded the County Club generates an operation surplus annually in the amount of $300,000.00 - $400,000.00 per year. He thinks the University Park County Club needs to separate obligated capital, improvements and enhancements to the County Club. There is obligatory capital that the UPCC is looking at to raise
$1,000,000.00 each year of surplus to ensure it has the capital needed for roof replacement, kitchen equipment, HVAC equipment, etc. Separate from the $1,000,000.00, the UPCC needs to generate funds for improvements such as building a new varsity club, renovating the grill, etc. Once the bond money is entirely spent, the District needs to address capital needs for the future for nonrecurring non-annual capital

A homeowner asked if the UPCC has not had a reserve fund until this point and is only now trying to fund one. Mr. Ludmerer confirmed that was an accurate statement.

Consideration of Resolution 2021- 11, Adopting Revised Rules of Procedure Pertaining Membership Categories and Amounts

Mr. Case requested a motion to continue the public hearing on Adopting the Revised Rules of Procedure to April 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. at the Varsity Club.

ON MOTION by Ms. Dickson, seconded by Mr. DiPaolo, with all in favor, the Board continued the Public Hearing on Adopting Revised Rules of Procedure Pertaining Membership Categories and Amounts to April 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. at the Varsity Club.

Review and Consideration of Resolution 2021-12, regarding Terminating of Additional Operation Recovery Surcharge

Mr. Barnebey recommended the Resolution to be deferred until that correction is made and consider at the Continued Meeting.

At 2:05 p.m., the meeting recessed. It was reconvened at 2:18 p.m.

Presentation of 90 Days Master Plan from Fawley Bryant

Mr. Case provided an overview of the Strategic Planning Group and Master Plan Presentation.

John Scott and Emmett Gregory reviewed the final presentation of the 90 Days Master Plan. Phase 1 of the master plan was understanding the history and culture of the Country Club in the first 30 days. Phase 2 was the second 30 days which details how the master plan would work. It took the vision of Fawley Bryant and the vision of the Board, Planning Group, and residents. Phase 3 is implementing the designs, and the University Park County Club is moving into the adoption of the Phase 1 projects. The Phase 1 projects include the following;

Modernization of the Grille & Banquet Room
An outdoor bar
Firepit area
Varsity Club
Administration
Card Room Modernization
Walking Trail Implementations on Parcel L
Low Impact ideas for Parcel L
Pickleball Complex Implementations
Option A. Existing Croquet Parcel
Option B. Parcel L

Multiuse Outdoor Space
Option-Regulation size croquet pitch
Yoga
Existing Parking expansions
Eastside of property outside hole 10
Estimate of Probable cost

Mr. Scott stated the long-term vision splits into two options depending on where pickleball is ultimately located:

Option A
Pickleball is located at existing croquet fields
Relocation of croquet
Grille and Banquet addition
Indoor/outdoor bar implementation
Option B
Location of Pickleball on Parcel L
Grille and Banquet addition
Indoor/outdoor bar implementation
Croquet remains in present location

The addition of future phases could look like the following:
New Cart Barn
New Cart staging
Repurpose Varsity Club into a Pro Shop
Restroom renovation to existing locker rooms on golf
Repurpose of the existing Pro Shop
Gathering space or
Grab & Go
Tennis Pro Shop Renovation/Expansion
Classrooms
Studio space for fitness
Tennis shade structure in existing garden space.
New Varsity Club Building
Car Parking area
Water Features- Fountains

John Scott commented the UPCC is a very beautiful club. It has matured established landscaping, vibrant culture and history, community feel, incredible views of golf and nature, award-winning golf experience, great response to the Covid-19 pandemic. It also had the availability for space and growth with parcel L and increasing village like quality. He received feedback that some of the interior spaces are dated, heavy furniture,

unfavorable layouts in existing buildings, car parking and circulation concerns, pedestrian safety, the bag drop & pro shop disconnect between golf.

Fawley Bryant compared existing Country Clubs within a 10-mile radius to find opportunities to get ahead of some of those Clubs. He summarized the landscaping in the District and the core values of the club.

John Scott reviewed improvements that need to make their way into The Master Plan that consist of the following immediate needs:
The Varsity Club
Cart Storage
Fitness
Pro Shop
Connect to Golf Operations
Locker and Storage Room Buildings
Cart Parking Expansion
Reimagine Entry Sequence
Sense of Arrival
Improving Pedestrian Connections
Integration of Brand & History
Great Membership Experience
Improve Village Quality and Connection
Widen Cart Paths
Walking Trails
Casual Dining/Outdoor Space
Activity and Meeting Space
Pickleball/Croquet Considerations
Parking Lot Improvements and Expansions
Improved Wayfinding
Vehicular & Pedestrian Traffic Pattern

John Scott discussed the village concepts. They are small intimate, and unique spaces designed for social interaction, locally driven, locally responsive, functional, and a mixed community. Fawley Bryant tried to put those into the Master Plan.

Emmett Gregory presented a wayfinding diagram. He discussed re-orientating the entry to a north-south orientation to make the entrance more prominent. He looked at vehicular circulation from entry point to final destination and golf wayfinding to make it as clear and concise as possible.

John Scott went through the diagrams with the various current features and expansions, including Option A & B for pickleball.

John Scott presented the future overall master plan, which includes the implementation of all phases of work.
Entry Boulevard
Grille & Banquet Renovation
Outdoor Dining
Indoor/Outdoor Bar
Fire Pits
Gathering Space
Cart Barn
Bag Drop
Restroom/ Locker Room
Cart Stagging
Varsity Club
Playground
Walking Trails
18. Multi-flex Lawn
Pickleball Complex
Option A
Option B
Tennis Pro-Shop / Fitness
Water Features
Gazebo

John Scott presented photos and renderings to depict the tone, design, and color palette for each project of the master plan outlined above.

A discussion took place regarding the estimate of probable cost. Fawley Bryant has continued to provide a range of costs and sent those costs over to a general contractor, Atlas Building Company, who put together an idea of cost. The numbers are for initial phase scope projects only. The list includes numbers for parking spaces, croquet, outdoor fitness, pickleball, outdoor dining, widening of cart paths, implementation of wayfinding signs, fire pits, walking trails, Varsity Club renovation, Banquet Grille renovation and the addition to that space. Emmett Gregory stated the numbers are in line, but what stood out was the pickleball court number was lower than Fawley Bryant, but it does not take clearing cost, lights, etc., into consideration. It is an excellent analysis to know that Fawley Bryant is on target with the cost as well.

John Scott discussed the long-term vision plans. He discussed the Grille & Banquet addition and the indoor/outdoor bar addition. Mr. Scott discussed the eventual relocation of the croquet courts. John Scott discussed the golf operations with the new cart barn, cart staging, and a repurposed Varsity Club Pro Shop and administration. There is room for 150 carts, mechanical offices, bag storage, restrooms, laundry, a breakroom, workshop, and hazmat storage. He discussed the proposed Varsity Club for the Pro Shop

and identified 2,970 square feet to use a Golf Pro Shop and golf offices. Relocating the Pro Shop to the existing Varsity Club will allow using the existing Pro Shop square footage for expanded gathering space and meetings and or utilize it for a grab and go. The Varsity Club will need to be established in a new Varsity Club building. He discussed the Tennis Pro Shop renovation and fitness classes. He presented a floor plan for the new Varsity Club and presented a floorplan of the final master plan. A QR code was provided, which links to a website with a video of the University Park County Club master plan renovations at https://www.fawleybryant.com/upcc. The video can be updated as the project proceeds. John Scott presented renderings of the outdoor dining space, the outdoor bar, fire pit area, the multi-use outdoor area, the indoor/outdoor bar, the new Varsity Club, The Tennis Pro Shop, and Golf bag drop.

The meeting recessed at 3:16 p.m. and reconvened at 3:26 p.m.

Consideration of Resolution 2021- 10, Approval of Final Master Plan from Fawley Bryant

Mr. Case stated he liked Fawley Bryant’s concepts. Some priorities were not addressed in the presentation, mainly the problems with the existing parking lot. John Scott stated those will be addressed in the near future and will be incorporated into the Master Plan. As part of the Phase 1 parking expansion, they will ensure a detailed sight-specific look at the critical needs and address those at that time.

A discussion took place about the inadequacy of the fitness center. Enhancing the current amenities is also a top priority as the master plan proceeds. Mr. Case raised concerns about the outside dining. He is reluctant to disturb Parcel L. He is not enthusiastic about building a pickleball court. The area adjacent to the current croquet pitch would be a good location for pickleball.

Ms. Dickson asked if the walking trails would weave around the existing trees to remove the mature landscaping. John Scott responded the intention is to create the trail on-site, walk Parcel L and understand where the trees worth saving are located and identify a route that would disturb minimum vegetation. Ms. Dickson had questions regarding the mixed-use space and John Scott noted the Board decides to assign that as the croquet pitch or mixed-use lawn and Fawley Bryant has identified an option to provide a separate croquet pitch which is north of the existing fitness center. If pickleball is located at Parcel L, there are opportunities to expand the existing croquet pitch to an entire side pitch on the site it stands currently. Ms. Dickson stated the entryway rendered does not change the existing drive. John Scott confirmed that is correct. Ms. Dickson stated the rendering is a lot of concrete which is a little in opposition to the Country Club wanting to keep the lush greenery. She asked if there is another way to accomplish the master plan without so much concrete. John Scott replied there is an opportunity to provide parking areas that

should alleviate some congestion. There is also an opportunity to freshen the landscape. Ms. Dickson noted the UPCC mission, vision, and core values talk about maintaining the natural landscape. Ms. Dickson is not in favor of putting pickleball courts on Parcel L. She wants Parcel L to be kept as natural.

Mr. Ludmerer discussed fitness options. He discussed widening cart paths as an unnecessary item and thinks the Country Club will have the same issues an issue with cars parking on the cart paths, unless specific cart parking areas are provided. . He believes Parcel L provides the best location for pickleball from an aesthetic and acoustic perspective. He provided an excerpt form a letter statement from UPCAI to UPRD dated March 28, 2021.

Mr. DiPaolo echoed the comments regarding the priority for fitness. The fitness area doesn’t work in the tennis area because it is too small. He suggested the proposed location of a new Varsity Club could be a good location for a fitness center. That would allow the tennis center to have a location for a pro shop to service tennis, pickleball, and fitness. He suggested taking a close look at the cart paths. He is skeptical the cost of a pickleball court would be only $50,000.00 more on Parcel L due to irrigation, electricity, restoration of landscaping.

Ms. Pagano stated the recommendation for putting the fitness center in the proposed Varsity Club spot is a great idea and asked where the Varsity Club would be placed. Mr. DiPaolo thinks that once the UPCC expands outdoor dining, it will be twice the size and unified with the promenade and take the current pro shop and serve the Varsity Club purpose. A lengthy discussion took place. Ms. Pagano asked John Scott if the cost estimate for the Varsity Club renovation is based on a refresh which was discussed. John Scott confirmed. Ms. Pagano is in favor of Parcel L as the location for pickleball. The UPCC can maintain a lot of the landscaping around the pickleball courts on Parcel L.

Mr. Case stated the District has to consider noise disturbance that pickleball may create wherever it is placed. A discussion took place about controlling acoustics.

Mr. Barnebey explained the Development of Reginal Impact has certain limitations The Country Club building has a size limit. The first phase of improvements will not cause any issues. Any significant improvements may require County approvals, and a new Varsity Club will trigger a Notice of Proposed Change to the existing DRI and Development Orders. Mr. Whyte discussed the DRI issues. By the time the UPCC gets around to expand, the DRI will likely have expired and not apply to the long-term master plan. Mr. Barnebey stated the DRI numbers match the current site plan, so the UPRD will probably have to amend something if they move forward with a significant development. When any major building expansion happens, the UPRD will have to modify the approvals, including the DRI, development orders or both, to increase the allowable square footage. John Scott stated everything presented for Phase 1 is viable under the current entitlements.

Mr. Fetsick stated #17 is an open space suggested as the multi-purpose land. The new Varsity Club is being shown to its right, which is also in Parcel L. If the Varsity Club building does not get developed, that is currently Parcel L. If the UPCC opens up #17 there is still going to be a cluster of woods to its right unless the entire space is open. He asked the Board to keep that in mind. The master plan has pickleball in two locations and gives both options.

Ms. Evans provided some feedback on the renovation. People need to be open to the fact that the way they have experienced Wednesday, or Friday night will be different and better in the end. Having the dining space in one area where people can move between spaces is ideal. For years she was asked to move happy hour outside to the café. Now the community will have it, love it, and they will not want to revert to previous aesthetics.

Mr. Case opened the floor for public comments

Mr. Duval provided some feedback regarding pickleball courts and the noise disturbance it will create. Tennis players will not want to play next to pickleball due to the noise. He commented on the visual of entry into the Country Club. He is in favor of placing pickleball in Parcel L.

Ms. Mary Jane Sanocore stated she moved into the community because of the trees and shade. She thinks Parcel L. is a treasure to the community and should not be developed Mr. Klein stated the architect’s vision is excellent. He put together an idea to put pickleball where the croquet is located and start the whole plan by not developing Parcel L. This will save money in water, electricity, clear-cutting, fill and restoration of landscaping. He discussed the walking trail.

Mr. Gibson stated there is a level of noise from pickleball, primarily from players and not the ball itself. He asked about the timeframe to develop parcel L. John Scott stated the difference between developing pickleball on Parcel L vs. on the croquet court is a 1-2 months difference. The overall process is 18-24 months for design, permitting, construction of pickleball no matter its location. Mr. Gibson suggested converting a tennis court to two pickleball courts.

Ms. Barbra Somma. thanked the Board and Fawley Bryant. She commented on the feedback regarding Ms. Evans's comments regarding expansion to dining areas and noted there were only minor changes to the kitchen area. She asked what is in the plan for the kitchen. Ms. Evans said there are no plans for the expansion of the kitchen. There may be a need to reconfigure the kitchen at some point. She does not know if a significant expansion of the kitchen is required but expanding the hours will help and offering service in different locations during the same hours of the day. The bigger challenge is finding

staff to service those extended hours. The kitchen will need new equipment in the current space at some point.

Mr. Kramer supports the concept of putting pickleball in Parcel L for noise reduction. It will be a major problem if it is anywhere near the outdoor activities. He asked if Fawley Bryant had the tennis pros input on their opinion. The covered roof concept for outdoor dining seems nice but has a potential for leakage and maintenance problems over time. He asked about HOA reserve and how that fits into this discussion. Mr. Case stated that the HOA reserves money for various future needs of the residential community for repaving roads. Any existing reserves for the HOA does not impact the UPRD budget and the discussion pertaining to the Master Plan. Mr. Ludmerer spoke to the tennis pros who were initially concerned about not having regular maintenance and observing violations of non- pickleball players using the courts. It is the same issue they have with tennis. Someone in the office can enforce the rules when a member points out the problem. Maintenance can be scheduled. The tennis pros left him with the impression they were neutral between the two proposed locations for pickleball. Mr. Nickerson brought up maintenance concerns.

John Scott addressed the concern regarding the covered roof concept. Fawley Bryant will give the Board options when that project goes into a complete design stage.

Mr. Gio Canterella complimented the Board and Fawley Bryant on their vision of the future. He thinks the UPCC should get more public comment on the location of pickleball. He commented on the noise disturbance. He thinks the Fawley Bryant recommendation of Parcel L is the most valid for the future.

Mr. Whyte congratulated Fawley Bryant on the Master Plan and the Board on their initiative to get the UPCC this far. He commented on the discussions of the Planning Group. They discussed fitness centers, wellness centers, and massage parlors. Building on Parcel L would have accomplished that. He encouraged the Board to keep as many flexible options as possible.

Ms. Joyce Giberti commented on the golf carts coming in the main entrance. She suggested having the golf carts trail be split separately, so they do not come through the main entrance.
Consideration of Resolution 2021- 10, Approval of Final Master Plan from Fawley Bryant

Mr. Case presented Resolution 2021-10. The Board reviewed Exhibit B, which is the same, and it orders the priorities of the Master Plan.

Mr. Barnebey wanted the Board to ensure it had the Final Master Plan from Fawley Bryant dated April 2021 was attached to the Resolution.

ON MOTION by Mr. DiPaolo, seconded by Ms. Dickson, lengthy discussion ensued in regards to the Exhibit A for the two alternatives for pickleball within the Resolution 2021- 10 the motion did not get carried.

Exhibit A maintains the two alternatives for pickleball. Mr. Case suggested the District vote on option A or exclude option B for the location of pickleball. A discussion took place. Mr. Ludmerer asked if the District can get opinions to suggest what the sound implications could be on an adequately insolated prepared shielded pickleball court. Fawley Bryant said they could reach out to Welch Tennis and those in the area who has pickleball courts to better understand its implications from a sound perspective. Mr. Ludmerer asked for a representative to look at both sites and recommend a location for pickleball. Fawley Bryant has racquet court experts they will recommend. John Scott noted his company is working in over 80 pickleball courts in Southwest Florida, and they are being built separate from tennis facilities for the reasons many people expressed today. Fawley Bryant recommends Parcel L for the location of pickleball. They also noted they will have to make drainage improvements around the ditch at the current croquet site to put pickleball there. They will not have to do additional screening with landscape vegetation in Parcel L. The cost implications are competitive. Parcel L can be visually and acoustically screened. John Scott commented locating pickleball in Parcel L will be a much greater asset than having it at the entry.

Ms. Dickson does not feel as though we understand all of the financial implications at this point. However, it is not a financial question. It is about preserving the natural landscape of Parcel L.
Mr. Case stated it is the consensus of the Board Pickleball not be Developed in Parcel L.

Mr. Ludmerer stated he believes the District has an opportunity to understand the impact of both locations better to learn from with greater expertise the implications of the sound in each location and how it could be mitigated. It would do a disservice to the community not to get that information.

ON MOTION by Mr. Case, seconded by Mr. DiPaolo, with 3 in favor (Mr. Case, Mr. DiPaolo, Ms. Dickson) and 2 opposed (Ms. Pagano and Mr. Ludmerer), the Board amended the Master Plan Concept from Fawley Bryant to exclude Option B for pickleball location on Parcel L.

The Board was asked to approve Resolution 2021-10 as amended.

ON MOTION by Mr. DiPaolo, seconded by Ms. Dickson, with 3 in favor (Mr. Case, Mr. DiPaolo, Ms. Dickson) and 2 opposed (Ms. Pagano and Mr. Ludmerer), the Board approved Resolution 2021-10, Approval of the amended Fawley Bryant Master Plan Concept dated April 2021 (removing Option B for pickleball location on Parcel L) as the Final Master Plan.

A discussion took place asking if, instead of going through a formal RFQ process, the District piggyback on Manatee County's ongoing services process and public advertisement. Mr. Barnebey stated the District could piggyback onto a project in lieu of going through an RFP process. Ms. Evans and Mr. Nickerson stated the thought is to piggyback off of an architectural services on-call or engineering services on call that the County typically has and a list of vendors and have the opportunity to pick from that approved vendor list. Mr. Barnebey thinks that it is possible.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Continuation

Mr. Case requested a motion to continue the meeting from the Board of Supervisors from April 9, 2021 to April 20, 2021 at 10:00AM at the Varsity Club.

ON MOTION by Ms. Dickson, seconded by Mr. Pagano, with all in favor, the Friday, April 9, 2021 Board of Supervisors' Meeting for University Park Recreation District was continued at 5:02 p.m. to Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. at the Varsity Club.

 	//,,
Secretary I Assistant Secretary

161 Page